planning commission staff report · the property. the discharge of water from the site occurs when...

Planning Commission Staff Report February 20, 2014 Project: Silverado Village File: EG-11-046 Request: Establishment of a Special Planning Area, Rezone, Tentative

Subdivision Map, Major Design Review for Tentative Subdivision Map, Development Agreement

Location: Northwest corner of Bond Road and Waterman Road APN: 127-0010-002, 017, 040, 104, 105, & 106 Staff: Christopher Jordan, AICP

Applicant Owner Agent Silverado Homes dba Vintara Holdings, LLC c/o R. Brian Spilman (Representative) 3300 Douglas Blvd. Suite 390 Roseville, CA 95661

Sacramento Area Sewer District c/o Dan Wukmir (Representative) 3711 Branch Center Road Sacramento, CA 95827

Wood Rodgers Inc. c/o Matt Spokely, PE (Representative) 3301 C Street, Suite 100-B Sacramento, CA 95816

Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution making a recommendation that the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Silverado Village Project (EG-11-046, the Project), subject to findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations and mitigation monitoring and reporting program; and

2. Adopt an Ordinance establishing the Silverado Village Special Planning Area (SVSPA) and Rezoning the subject property from RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, and O to SVSPA;

3. Adopt a Resolution approving the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Silverado Village Project (EG-11-046, the Project), subject to the draft findings and conditions of approval contained herein; and

4. Adopt an Ordinance adopting the Silverado Village Development Agreement. Project Description The Project proposes development of a 230-acre residential community located north of Bond Road and west of Waterman Road. The proposed Project includes a rezone from the existing zoning of RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, and Open Space to Silverado Village Special Planning Area. If approved, the Project will develop 660 single family units and up to 125 independent/assisted living/memory care units. The Applicant’s intent is to develop the Project in three distinct villages.

• Village 1, located along the western boundary of the site abutting Quail Ranch Estates to the west and Bond Road to the south, proposes a maximum of 135 single-family detached homes.

1

skyles

Typewritten Text

AGENDA ITEM No. 5.2

skyles

Typewritten Text

skyles

Typewritten Text

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014

• Village 2 is located to the west of Waterman Road, south of the proposed detention basin and open space, and north of Village 3. An open space parcel would separate Village 2 from Village 1. Village 2 proposes a maximum of 258 single-family detached homes.

• Village 3 is located in the southeast corner of the parcel, adjacent to Village 1 to the west and Village 2 to the north, and is west of Waterman Road and north of Bond Road. Village 3 would be age--‐restricted to adults 55 and over. Village 3 proposes a maximum of 267 active adult single-family patio homes. Within the “village core,” a lodge facility is proposed with a maximum of 125 units for independent living, assisted living, and/or memory care for seniors. A clubhouse and swim facility proposed adjacent to the lodge would provide a centrally located gathering space.

In addition to the three villages, the Project includes:

• A 64.5-acre wetland habitat preserve area and a 6.5-acre open space parcel, providing a total of 71 acres of open space in the northern portion of the property.

• A15.7-acre open space area that will provide storage for a100-year storm event, improve flood protection and water quality for urban runoff, and provide a buffer between Villages 1 and 2.

• Up to 6.1 acres of parkland.

• A public trail system.

• Street and utility improvements to serve the proposed uses. Background In 1996, the County Board of Supervisors approved a Tentative Subdivision Map for the Project site which was known as Elk Ridge Estates (also included the 40-acre parcel west of the northeast boundary, north of Campbell Road). The Elk Ridge Estates project consisted of 746 single-family lots, approximately 50 acres of parks and open space, and 12.4 acres of recreational facilities. Although the tentative map was approved by the County, the project was never implemented and the subdivision map expired. The 230 acre site is currently owned by the Sacramento Area Sewer District (SASD) and was declared as surplus property in 2000 as the property no longer was part of the district’s future plans. In 2006, the City of Elk Grove approved the Vintara Park Project, which covered the same area as the proposed Silverado Village Project and included development of 670 dwelling units. Ultimately, the Vintara Park Project did not move forward due to a lawsuit. In 2011, the Project applicant, Vintara Holdings LLC/Silverado Homes submitted an application to develop the Silverado Village project. This Project, while located on the same property, has been redesigned from the original Vintara Park project as described in this report. Silverado Homes conducted extensive public outreach with area residents and stakeholders and continued meeting with these individuals throughout the application process. While not all

2

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 of the resident/stakeholder concerns have been revised to the satisfaction of the residents, the Applicant has attempted to address them to the extent possible. A discussion of these outstanding issues is provided in the Analysis section below. Project Setting The proposed Silverado Village Project site consists of approximately 230 acres located at the northwest corner of Bond Road and Waterman Road and has approximately 2,134 linear feet of frontage along Bond Road and 1,760 linear feet of frontage along Waterman Road. State Highway 99 is located less than two miles west of the site. See Figure 1. The site is relatively level terrain with the exception of several, non-engineered man-made ponds and a large depression located on site. Historically, the site has been utilized for agricultural and industrial uses. However, the site has been vacant since the acquisition of the property by SASD. The elevation ranges from 40 to 65 feet above mean sea level. Surface runoff flows towards the south and southwest into topographic lows that include portions of Whitehouse Creek, seasonal wetlands, vernal pools, ephemeral drainages, and the onsite ponds. The headwaters of Whitehouse Creek begins at the westerly boundary of the Project site and traverses downstream in a northwesterly direction away from the site. The large ponds appear to be the result of past berming and grading activities. In addition, many of the linear depressions on the site appear to be a result of historic excavation activities and may be related to past agricultural practices on the property. The discharge of water from the site occurs when the ponds are significantly inundated and exits the site via a leaky, non-engineered weir, overland swales, and roadside ditches, eventually discharging into Whitehouse Creek to the west. The Project site is bound by Waterman Road, vacant land, rural residential uses, and Laguna Creek to the east; Bond Road and single family residential uses to the south; and single family residential development to the west, with a vacant area adjacent to the northwest. General Plan and Zoning designations and land uses adjacent the project are summarized in Table 1.

3


Figure 1 – Project Site

Table 1 – Adjacent Land Designations and Uses

Existing Uses General Plan Zoning

Project Site Vacant

Rural Residential, Low Density Residential,

Commercial/Office/Multi- Family

RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, RD- 5(F), and O

North Sheldon Road Ranch Estates Rural Residential AR-2

South Fallbrook Subdivision and Summer Place

Subdivision

Low Density Residential,

Public/Quasi Public RD-5, O(F), O

West Apartment

complex; single family residences

Estate Residential AG-80, AR-5, AR- 5(F), AR-10

East Quail Ranch Estates, rural residential uses,

and vacant land

Rural Residential; Low Density Residential

RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, AR-5, RD-2, RD-5, RD-5(F), AR-5(F)

Project Site

4

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 Analysis The proposed Project has been reviewed in accordance with the City’s General Plan, the development standards of Title 23 of the Municipal Code (herein after the Zoning Code), and the City’s Design Guidelines. The following summarizes the results of this analysis. General Plan Consistency The General Plan identifies the Project site with rural residential, low density residential and commercial uses. Based upon the gross acreage of land in the various land use categories, the General Plan allows for a maximum of 1,182 residential units. Table 2 summarizes the allowances under the General Plan.

Table 2 – General Plan Allowed Development

Land Use Approximate Acres

Allowed Density Range

(Dwellings per Acre)

Assumed Density

Development Potential

Rural Residential 80 0.1 – 0.5 2 acre minimum 40 Low Density Residential 146 4.1 – 7.0 7 dwelling units

per acre 1,022

Commercial/Office/ Multifamily 4 15.1 – 30.0 30 dwelling units

per acre 120

Total 230 - - 1,182 The Project proposes a total of 660 dwellings units, which is within the 1,182 units contemplated by the General Plan. The Project accomplishes this with a combination of product types that range from 4.2 dwelling units per acre to 7.9 dwelling units per acre, with an average density of 5.7 dwelling units per acre. Typically, the City requires that the density of each village, or phase, of a development project reflect the maximum allowed density of the underlying General Plan designation. Therefore, the Village 3 area, which has a density of 7.9 dwellings per acre, exceeds the allowed density range for a portion of the site (that portion within the Low Density Residential area). However, General Plan policy CAQ-7 allows for the clustering of development in order to protect wetlands, stream corridors, scenic areas, or other natural features as open space. The Project proposes to place 67 acres of developable land in a permanent preserve to protect on-site wetlands. The Project would also set aside an additional 6.3 acres for preservation, and maintain the existing 14.8 acre pond. As such, the Project qualifies for utilization of this policy and may take advantage of development clustering to exceed the density range within specific villages, provided the overall density does not exceed the range allowed by the General Plan. As mentioned, the Project has an average density if 5.7 dwellings per acre, which is within the range allowed. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the General Plan. Zoning The existing zoning for the Project site reflects the zoning as approved by Sacramento County for the Elk Ridge Estates project in the 1990s. As such, it must be amended as part of the Project to reflect the General Plan and the Project components. The applicant is proposing to establish a Special Planning Area, or SPA, for the site. A SPA is a special zoning document that establishes development standards and allowed use requirements for sites or projects that benefit from

5

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 special considerations and regulation in a way that the general zoning requirements cannot address. As mentioned, the Project proposes to take advantage of the density clustering provisions of the General Plan in order to meet General Plan compliance and preserve large areas of wetlands and other natural features in perpetuity. Therefore, the use of the SPA process is appropriate, as application of standard RD-4 or RD-5 zoning would not provide the necessary density range consistent with the proposal. The Applicant has prepared a draft SPA, which staff has reviewed and revised ; it is provided as Exhibit A in Attachment 1. The draft SPA covers the following topics:

• Development standards for each of the three planned villages • Allowed uses • Design and development standards for pedestrian connections and trails throughout the

Project area • Requirements for community amenities

Some of the special development standards addressed in the SPA include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Requirements for lots abutting the Quail Ranch subdivision to the west, including: o Limits on development to single story homes for lots abutting the shared property

line o Requirements for a masonry wall along the shared property line o Provisions addressing tree protection along the shared property line o Minimum setback requirements for lots abutting the shared property line o Design requirements for pedestrian connection between the two subdivisions

• Special standards for the lots in Village 3 (age-restricted area) o Unique setback and lot size requirements o Specific internal roadway design standards, which deviate from City-wide

standards o Pedestrian connectivity requirements

Subdivision Design As previously mentioned, the Applicant has proposed a Project divided into three villages, along with various parks, open space, drainage and pedestrian/trail lots. Figure 2 is the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map with the various components highlighted.

6


Figure 2 – Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map

Legend Single Family

Age Restricted

Parks

Open Space

Lodge

Trails/Paseos

Drainage

Village 2-A

Village 1-A

Village 2-B

Village 1-B

Village 3

7

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 Traffic and Circulation The overall subdivision is designed utilizing a modified grid pattern. Primary access is taken from Bond Road at Crowell Drive (the existing three-way signal would be converted to a four-way intersection). This primary road, named Silverado Drive, would extend north into the subdivision, then turns east towards, and connects to, Waterman Road as the Project’s second point of access. Local residential streets would take access from this central spine. The two primary intersections within the subdivision along Silverado Drive (A Drive and B Drive) would be designed with traffic circles/roundabouts. A third roundabout could be developed at Silverado Drive and Waterman Road in the future pursuant to the Rural Roads Improvement Standards; a condition of approval addressing the dedication for this future roundabout has been included in the draft resolution. A third point of access into the subdivision would be provided by G Street intersecting Bond Road at the far west end of the Project. Access at this intersection would be limited to right-in/right-out movements. As mentioned, access to the Project is provided by Bond Road and Waterman Road. The Project does not propose any connections to the west, either into the Quail Ranch subdivision or the Campbell Road neighborhood. The Planning Commission should be aware, however, that an adjacent land owner, Mr. Gyan Kalwani, has requested that C Court, the road at the northwestern most corner of the developed portion of the Project, be designed with a connection into his property (APN 127-0010-056). Correspondence from Mr. Kalwani’s engineer is provided as Attachment 5. Mr. Kalwani’s property was part of the previously-approved Elk Ridge Estates project, which included the Project site. Mr. Kalwani has indicated that he desires to develop his property and he believes that access from the Project is necessary to serve his property. The Applicant has indicated that they do not wish to provide this connection. C Court could be modified in the future to provide connection to Mr. Kalwani’s property; however, adequate future access could be obtained by providing a connection to Elk Grove-Florin Road and a second connection to Sheldon Road through the extension of the existing Country Hill Drive. These points of access will be further analyzed upon submittal of a development application for this property. The use of cul-de-sacs has been limited to the western edge of the project, adjacent the Campbell Road neighborhood and in the central area of Village 2. Where appropriate, the cul-de-sacs provide pedestrian connections to adjoining trails. Pedestrian Circulation and Trails Pedestrian circulation is facilitated through the project in three ways. First, all streets within Villages 1 and 2 include sidewalks along both sides of the street. Sidewalks along Silverado Drive and I and J Streets utilize detached walks with landscaping between the curb and walk. In the case of Silverado Drive, this helps to identify the street as a primary residential street within the subdivision. For I and J Streets, the separate walk acts as an enhanced pedestrian space, connecting the pedestrian connection to the Quail Ranch subdivision at Bob White Court with the 0.6± acre park (Lot K). The Project also includes several off-street trails (see Figure 2). These trails connect the two parks together, following the drainage/detention area, and connect the Project to the future trail corridor under the power line corridor along Waterman Road. A portion of the power line trail is provided along the eastern side of the Project. The trails network also includes two “mid-block” connections. The first connects the Project to the adjacent Quail Ranch subdivision to the west,

8

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 providing pedestrian access for residents in this area to the Project’s parks and open spaces. Secondly, a connection between M Street (along the eastern edge of the drainage/detention basin) and Silverado Drive/U Street provides convenient access for residents in the southern portion of Village 2 to the primarily trail along the detention basin. Within Village 3, the street system is designed as a series of private lanes. As such, sidewalks are not provided along the street. Rather, a network of paseos runs down the middle of most blocks. This design is iideal since, as described in the draft SPA, the “front doors” of the units will face into the block with just the garage accessible from the private lanes. These paseos provide connections to both the trail system and the public sidewalks surrounding the Village 3 area, including along Silverado Drive, Bond Road, and Waterman Road. Parks The Project includes two public park sites in Villages 1 and 2 and four private park sites within the Village 3 area. The first public park site is located at Silverado Drive and B Street approximately 700 feet north of Bond Road. This park, identified on the Tentative Subdivision Map as Lot K, measures 0.6± acres and would likely be developed with a small play structure and other local park amenities (e.g., benches, water fountain, small grass area). The second park site, Lot G, measures 4.9± acres and is located at the north end of the Project at the intersection of A Street and Silverado Drive. It would likely be developed with a play structure and some non-programed field space. It would likely include a picnic area and small court facility like a tennis court, basketball court, volleyball court, and possibly water play. Parking and restrooms may be developed, but are dependent on what facilities are chosen through future park concept plan development and public outreach. This park site has generated controversy with the community. Specifically, the following concerns have been raised by the public:

• The park site is within the Rural Residential area of the General Plan and, as such, should not have public sewer or water.

• The location is not in the best interest of the community and would be better served within the Village 2 area.

While the majority of the Lot G park is within the Rural Residential General Plan area, access to public water and sewer should not, and cannot, be restricted. Specifically, a small portion of the park site, at the intersection of Silverado Drive and A Drive, is within the Low Density Residential area. General Plan policy PF-10, as follows, identifies that the City discourages the use of public sewer systems in the Rural Residential area.

PF-10 The City shall strongly discourage the extension of sewer service into any area designated for Rural Residential land uses. Sewers shall not be used to accommodate lot sizes smaller than 2 (two) gross acres in the Rural Residential area, and lot sizes shall be large enough to accommodate septic systems. This policy shall not be construed to limit the ability of any sewer agency to construct “interceptor” lines through or adjacent to the Rural Residential area, provided that no “trunk” or service lines are provided within the Rural Residential area.

9

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 Should bathrooms be constructed within the park, sewer access would likely be provided from a lateral line that connects to the sewer main within A Drive. This lateral would be sized to accommodate only the flows from the bathrooms and would not provide any service capacity beyond the park site itself (e.g., to the north). The bathrooms could also be located within the Low Density Residential area of the park site; however, this would be a significant design limitation on the Cosumnes Community Services District (CCSD) when they design and construct the site. Alternatively, the CCSD could develop the site with a septic system; however, this would increase the development and maintenance costs for the District and is not advisable. There are no City policies or standards prohibiting the use of public water on the proposed park site. Additionally, the installation of a well to serve the site (drinking water, irrigation, bathrooms, etc.) would increase the maintenance requirements for the facility and be an impact to CCSD. The location of the park site presents a balanced approach to the design of the subdivision. While a location central to Village 2 would allow shorter access to the facility, the proposed location is along the two main trail corridors within the Project. The site also allows for views into the preserve, allowing park users an opportunity to enjoy open space within the City. Finally, this location is preferred by the Elk Grove Police Department. At this location, officers patrolling the area can easily access the site and efficiently view across the property. Drainage As mentioned, the Project site serves as a portion of the headwaters for Whitehouse Creek. Flows from the property are currently directed into a man-made pond along the western side of the site where they flow through a leaky, non-engineered weir and ultimately into Whitehouse Creek. As proposed, the majority of the Project’s drainage will flow into the existing man-made pond area which is proposed to be reconstructed as an engineered detention basin, consistent with the City’s Storm Drainage Master Plan. Stormwater entering the detention area will be treated in two water quality basins before flowing through a new culvert and outfalling into Whitehouse Creek. The proposed design is consistent with the previously-approved 404 permit (Section 4 of the Clean Water Act) for the property, approved by the Army Corps of Engineers in April 2008). A small portion of the Project, 12 acres located around Bond Road and G Street, will not be directed to the proposed detention basin. Rather, flows from this area will be serviced by the existing Bond Road storm drain system. This system collects runoff from a variety of subdivisions along Bond Road and directs the flow west to Laguna Creek. As described in the Storm Drainage Master Plan, the Bond Road system is currently undersized for existing flows and will be upsized as part of a pending Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project (Project No. WDR022). The Applicant proposes to dovetail with this CIP project and finance an additional upsizing component to accommodate the 12-acre area. Staff has analyzed the potential downstream effects of this additional flow on Laguna Creek and has determined that there are no impacts to the Creek. There is sufficient capacity in Laguna Creek to accommodate the projected flows. Staff has heard a number of concerns regarding drainage from area residents. The most significant concern expressed is potential impacts to the Sheldon Road Ranch Estates properties directly north of the Project, including Armaria Court, Saint Anthony Court, and Saint Jude Court. The approval of this subdivision by Sacramento County in the 1970s included the establishment of a series of drainage courses that directed stormwater to the shared property line with the subject Project. Drainage is collected through these courses and into a pipe that directs the

10

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 water onto the subject property. The water then flows through the on-site wetlands and down to the drainage basin. The Applicant’s drainage plan for the Project anticipates and incorporates the potential drainage from the subdivision to the north, so there are no concerns from a drainage capacity standpoint. The larger concern is the ability of water to flow from the Sheldon Road Ranch Estates project to the drainage basin. While the County permitted the flows, the condition of the north 80 acres of the Project site results in sediment blocking flows during large storm events. To address this issue, the County would occasionally clean out the water course. Unfortunately, with the presence of wetlands on the Project site, and the approval of the 404 permit by the Army Corps of Engineers, continued maintenance is not feasible. Therefore, in 2012 the City installed a dry well at the southern end of St. Anthony Court. The intent of this dry well is to collect storm water flows and direct them into the aquifer, thereby alleviating impacts to properties in Sheldon Road Ranch Estates. Staff will continue to monitor these improvements and address issues as they arise. In any event, the old approach of maintenance activities on the Project site is not sustainable because of the permitting issues under the Clean Water Act. Trees There are a number of existing trees on the subject property. The majority of the trees are located in the southwest corner of the site. The location, species, and health of these trees were documented by the City’s Arborist in a report prepared in January 2012. The Arborist made recommendations regarding which trees should be retained and which should be removed due to structural/health issues or potential conflicts with the proposed development. A condition of approval authorizing removal of those trees recommended by the Arborist for removal has been included in the draft conditions. Any trees retained on the property will become secured trees pursuant to the City’s tree regulations (Chapter 19.12 of the Municipal Code) and subject to mitigation if removed by future homeowners. Additionally, there are a substantial number of trees along the shared property line with the Quail Ranch subdivision. During the Applicant’s outreach with area residents and stakeholders, Quail Ranch residents requested that lots adjoining their homes be developed with a solid masonry wall. The Arborist’s report includes an analysis of the potential impacts to these trees as a result of the proposed Project and this wall. Generally, the Arborist recommends that the masonry wall be developed using pier foundations/footings, rather than a unified stem wall and footing. This design will limit impacts to trees in Quail Ranch while still satisfying the desires of neighboring residents. The pier foundation/footings can be implemented for the majority of the boundary with Quail Ranch; however, lots at the northern end of Quail Ranch will require additional engineering and alternative designs. Specifically, lots 77 through 84 of Village 1-A will be up to five feet higher than the adjoining lot in Quail Ranch. To ensure storm drainage from these lots does not impact the Quail Ranch lots, these lots will require special engineering and design and may require the use of stem wall footings, rather than the preferred pier design. Understanding this potential conflict with the desires of the Quail Ranch residents, staff recommends that a condition be placed on the Project requiring the Applicant to work with the neighbors to address potential impacts to effected trees. In a worst-case scenario, the shared property line for these lots may need to be moved to the east into the Project, resulting in slightly shallower lots than those typically presented on the Tentative Subdivision Map. To avoid a “no-

11

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 mans-land” between the two projects, the Applicant must apply for Boundary Line Adjustments, where needed. Age Restricted Development and Lodge As mentioned, Village 3 of the proposed Project includes 267 age-restricted cottages/single family dwellings. These units are served by private lanes with primary access from Silverado Drive. This Village also includes the future development of a Lodge and Clubhouse to serve the residents in the cottages. Uses permitted in the Lodge and Clubhouse under the SPA specifically include the following:

1. Lodge Facility A. Independent Living Apartments B. Assisted Living Apartments C. Specialized Care Units (memory care for Alzheimer’s and dementia residents.) D. Restaurant E. General retail use, less than 10,000 square feet, Pharmacy or other similar retail F. Retail/Office space G. Beauty Salon H. Crafts room, Media room, meeting room I. Common Kitchen J. Common Laundry room K. Doctor’s office, exam room, nursing station L. Leasing and Real Estate Sales Office M. Services consistent with the nature of the development

2. Clubhouse, Recreation & Swim Facility:

A. Bistro/Café with full kitchen facilities B. Dining and sitting areas, meeting rooms, recreation & gaming rooms C. Swimming Pool, indoor or outdoor, and accompanying structure and equipment D. Spa or hot tub E. Fitness room F. Changing room and showers G. Offices

Future development of the Lodge and Clubhouse will require subsequent Design Review, an entitlement which requires Planning Commission review and approval. Development Agreement During the Applicant’s outreach with area residents and stakeholders, a concern was expressed that the Project could be amended in the future such that it is no longer consistent with the desires of the residents and stakeholders. Should this Project be approved, any amendments to the design, conditions of approval, and development standards under the SPA would require action by the City Council. The Applicant is concerned that this approach is insufficient to address the concerns of the residents and stakeholders. Therefore, they have requested that the City also enter into a Development Agreement, which would further clarify and restrict the development of the Project consistent with the approvals of the City Council. Development Agreements typically address special development requirements for projects (e.g., public infrastructure), extensions to the approval period for projects, and special provisions

12

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 for impact fees paid by the subject project. For this Project, the Applicant is requesting a Development Agreement that addresses the need for certainty requested by the residents and stakeholders and provides a ten year life to the Project approvals (specifically the Tentative Subdivision Map). Staff has worked with the Applicant to draft such an agreement and it is provided in Exhibit E of Attachment 1. It should be noted that nothing in the Development Agreement, SPA, or Tentative Subdivision Map limits the ability of the City to amend these documents of approval in the future. Furthermore, while the Development Agreement would provide a ten year life to the Tentative Subdivision Map, rather than the standard three year life under the Municipal Code, the SPA will function in perpetuity as the zoning for the property. Therefore, the SPA has the greatest weight of any of the Project components. Letters from Commenting Agencies This Project was routed to various City, County, and State agencies for review. Comments from agencies have either been addressed through the processing of the Project or have been included as draft conditions of approval. Environmental Analysis The California Environmental Quality Act (Section 21000, et. seq. of the California Public Resources Code, hereafter CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary “projects.” A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” The proposed Project is a project under CEQA. Given the scope and scale of this Project, and pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, staff has proceeded with the development of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Draft EIR, which initiated the environmental review process for the Project, was distributed to Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public on January 25, 2013. The 30-day NOP comment period was from January 25, 2013 through February 26, 2013. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was released September 27, 2013. The 45-day comment period was from September 27, 2013 through November 11, 2013. The comment period allows Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public to submit comments in regards to the adequacy of the Draft EIR. The NOA specified that comments regarding the Draft EIR may be made in writing to the Planning Department or at a public meeting, which was held before the Planning Commission on November 7, 2013. The Draft EIR has identified the following environmental issue areas as having potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Project:

• Aesthetics • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Air Quality • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Biological Resources • Hydrology and Water Quality • Cultural Resources • Noise • Geology and Soils • Transportation and Circulation

13

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 In summary, while the majority of potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Project would be less than significant or would be reduced to less than significant after imposing the mitigation measures identified in the DEIR, two significant and unavoidable impacts were identified. The significant and unavoidable impacts identified were:

• Impact 3.3-8: Potential to have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, specifically the Northern Hardpan Valley Hardpan Vernal Pool, identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

• Impact 3.12-2: Potential to conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy

establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system: Freeways. The Project’s potential to result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with State highways is described in Section 3.12 of the DEIR.

As mentioned, the public comment period on the Draft EIR closed on November 11, 2013. In addition to the verbal comments provided at the November 7, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, 48 written comments were received by the City. Staff has prepared responses to each of these comments and documented them in the draft Final EIR, included as Attachment 2. None of the comments alter or impact the analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR. Substantial revisions to the EIR and recirculation of the document are not necessary. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared, which contains mitigation measures aimed at avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts to the extent feasible. However, while any environmental detriment caused by the Project has been minimized to the extent feasible through the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP, certain significant and unavoidable impacts in the areas of Biological Resources and Transportation and Circulation will still occur, even with the inclusion of these mitigation measures. Therefore, in order to certify the EIR and approve the Project, the City must be able to find that the significant social, environmental, economic, and land use benefits of the Project outweigh and counterbalance these unavoidable environmental impacts. Draft Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations have been prepared and included in Attachment 3. Recommended Motions Should the Planning Commission agree with staff’s recommendation, the following motions are suggested:

1. “I move that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, adopting Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Silverado Village Project No. EG-11-046;”

2. “I move that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the Silverado Village Special Planning Area and rezoning the Project site into the Silverado Village Special Planning Area;”

14


3. “I move that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Silverado Village Project No. EG-11-046 subject to the findings and conditions of approval provided in the draft resolution;” and

4. “I move that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance entering into the draft Development Agreement with Vintara Holdings, LLC relative to the Development Known as Silverado Village EG-11-046.”

Findings CEQA Finding: The Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City. Evidence: Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Project. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Draft EIR, which initiated the environmental review process for the Project, was distributed to Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public on January 25, 2013. The 30-day NOP comment period was from January 25, 2013 through February 26, 2013. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was released September 27, 2013. The 45-day comment period was from September 27, 2013 through November 11, 2013. The comment period allows Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public to submit comments in regards to the adequacy of the Draft EIR. The NOA specified that comments regarding the Draft EIR may be made in writing to the Planning Department or at a public meeting, which was held before the Planning Commission on November 7, 2013. The Draft EIR has identified the following environmental issue areas as having potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Project:


In summary, while the majority of potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Project would be less than significant or would be reduced to less than significant after imposing the mitigation measures identified in the DEIR, two significant and unavoidable impacts were identified. The significant and unavoidable impacts identified were:


15


• Impact 3.12-2: Potential to conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system: Freeways. The Project’s potential to result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with State highways is described in Section 3.12 of the DEIR.

As mentioned, the public comment period on the Draft EIR closed on November 11, 2013. In addition to the verbal comments provided at the November 7, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, 48 written comments were received by the City. Staff has prepared responses to each of these comments and documented them in the draft Final EIR, included as Attachment 2 of the February 20, 2014 Planning Commission staff report. None of the comments alter or impact the analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR. Substantial revisions to the EIR and recirculation of the document are not necessary. Establishment of Special Planning Area Finding #1: The proposed SPA is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. Evidence #1: The proposed Silverado Village SPA provides an opportunity to develop the subject property while preserving the wetland features that are present on the property. The density of the proposed land plan is consistent with policy CAQ-7 of the General Plan, which provides opportunities for clustering development in order to preserve natural features. The overall proposed density and intensity of uses is consistent with allowed density and intensity of land uses provided on the General Plan Land Use Map. Proposed uses for the site are consistent with the allowed uses allowed through General Plan Policy LU-3. Therefore, the proposed SPA is consistent with the goals and polices of the General Plan. Finding #2: That the proposed SPA meets the requirements set forth in EGMC Section 23.16.100. Evidence #2: The proposed SPA includes all of the mandatory components identified in EGMC Section 23.16.100.D, including, but not limited to, list of permitted uses, particularly in the Village 3 area which provides opportunities for development of a lodge and clubhouse, providing local retail uses for residents in the age-restricted village; performance and development standards for development in all three proposed villages; a legal description for the property; and a listing of reasons for establishment of the SPA. Finding #3: The area included within the SPA zone has one (1) or more unusual environmental, historical, architectural, land use mixtures, or other specified significant features which justify the adoption of the SPA zone. Evidence #3: The site of the proposed SPA includes extensive wetlands which will be preserved consistent with the approved 404 Permit for the Project. The proposed SPA will allow for the clustering of development to facilitate this wetland preservation. Additionally, the proposed SPA facilitates the unique development proposed in the Village 3 area through development standards and land use mix that cannot be satisfied through the City’s standard zoning regulations. Further, the presence of trees along the shared property line with development to the west, along with concerns expressed by area residents and stakeholders, requires the establishment of unique development standards, such as alternative minimum lot depths, requirements for side lot lines to match those in the adjacent development, and restrictions on development of two story homes. These special requirements are best implemented through the adoption of a SPA.

16

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 Finding #4: The features cannot be adequately protected by the adoption of any existing standard zone regulation. Evidence #4: The protection of trees along the shared property line with development to the west, resident and stakeholder concerns, and the preservation of on-site wetlands through the implementation of the General Plan clustering provisions cannot, together, be adequately implemented through existing standard zoning regulations. For example, the City’s standards for single family residential lots do not provide flexibility for lot depth such that the trees along the shared property line could be adequately protected. Tentative Subdivision Map Finding: None of the findings (a) through (g) below in Section 66474 of the California Government Code that require a City to deny approval of a tentative map apply to this project.

a. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.

b. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

c. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. d. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause

substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

f. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

g. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements will conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

Evidence: Findings (a) through (g) in Section 66474 of the California Government Code do not apply to the project.

a. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the General Plan for the City. Specifically, the design and density of development provides, implements, and is consistent with the allowed density and intensity for the site as provided on the General Plan Land Use Map. Further, the configuration of development is supported by General Plan Policy CAQ-7, which allows for clustering of development.

b. The design and improvement is consistent with the General Plan as the density and intensity of development proposed is consistent with that specifically allowed under the General Plan Land Use Plan.

c. The Project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

d. The Project proposes the development of 660 residential units, along with future development of a lodge/clubhouse with assisted living facility. The ultimate gross density of the Project is 2.87 dwelling units per area. The General Plan identified the site for future development at an average density of 5.14 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the Project is less dense than allowed under the General Plan. Furthermore, all proposed lots

17


meet the applicable development standards and will be adequately served by the proposed and conditioned public services and infrastructure.

e. The Project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

f. The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project including potential issues related to prior uses of the Project site.

g. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large as demonstrated by review of the Project by the City’s Public Works Department.

Design Review Finding #1: The proposed Project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, specific plan provisions, special planning area provisions, Citywide design guidelines, and improvement standards adopted by the City. Evidence #1: As previously mentioned, the Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the proposed subdivision is consistent with the requirements of the proposed SPA. The proposed Project utilizes a modified grid street system with limited cul-de-sacs, furthering provision 3.A.2.2 of the Citywide Design Guidelines. The primary residential street through the Project (Silverado Drive) utilizes separated sidewalks as provided in provision 3.A.2.4.d and the City’s improvement standards. Finding #2: The proposed Project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation. Evidence #2: The design of the Project includes extensive public trails and pedestrian paths consistent with provision 3.A.2.5 of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Trails Master Plan, which in providing alternative mobility opportunities for residents will address potential vehicular impacts. Key pedestrian crossings are conditioned to include enhanced paving as provided in provision 3.A.2.7. Pedestrian connections from the neighborhood to external streets are provided in all three proposed villages as provided in provision 3.A.2.9. Finding #3: For residential subdivision design review applications, the residential subdivision is well integrated with the City’s street network, creates unique neighborhood environments, reflects traditional architectural styles, and establishes a pedestrian friendly environment. Evidence #3: As previously mentioned, the Project utilizes a modified grid street system that connects to existing major roadways at logical points. The design creates several unique environments through the layout of lots around the proposed detention basin and the configuration of the age-restricted development in Village 3. The Project includes extensive public trails and pedestrian paths consistent with provision 3.A.2.5 of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Trails Master Plan. The architecture of the future proposed homes and lodge/clubhouse buildings will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s Design Guidelines as part of subsequent Design Review. Development Agreement Finding #1: The Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies, land uses, and implementation programs and any other applicable specific plans.

18

Elk Grove Planning Commission Silverado Village (EG-11-046) February 20, 2014 Evidence #1: The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan as it provides the opportunity to develop the site with residential and commercial uses consistent with the land use plan in the General Plan. Furthermore, the development plan that the Development Agreement implements includes compliance with General Plan Policy CAQ-7, which allows for density clustering in order to protect natural resources. Resources protected by the Project include wetlands and trees. Finding #2: The Development Agreement is in conformance with the public convenience and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the City as a whole. Evidence #2: The Development Agreement provides a mechanism for development of the Project site consistent with the proposed development plan, providing some assurance to area residents and stakeholders that the Project will be implemented consistent with the proposal. It should be noted that Development Agreements may be amended but the same public hearing process shall be followed as provided for the adoption of the Development Agreement. Finding #3: The Development Agreement will promote the orderly development of property and the preservation of property values. Evidence #3: The Development Agreement promotes orderly development by supporting the proposed Project and ensuring implementation consistent with the proposed development plan. The development plan identifies the necessary water, sewer, storm drainage, and roadway improvements necessary to serve the Project. For example, the Project includes the construction of various on-site improvements to collect, detain, and release stormwater into the existing Whitehouse Creek consistent with existing peak flows. Additionally, the Project includes the upsizing of the Bond Road storm drain system to accommodate a portion of the on-site stormwater flows. This improvement is conditioned to occur concurrently with and as part of the City’s upsizing of the same facility to address existing deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system. By combining these two upsizing activities together, the City is promoting orderly development and the preservation of property values by limiting disturbance to area residences and business to the extent feasible. Attachments 1. Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Approval to the City Council

Exhibit A – Silverado Village Special Planning Area Exhibit B – Rezone Exhibit Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval Exhibit D - Tentative Subdivision Map and Related Exhibits Exhibit E – Draft Development Agreement

2. Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report – Available online at http://www.egplanning.org/environmental/silverado-village/index.asp

3. Draft Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4. Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5. Letter from Mr. Terry Rose re: Mr. Gyan Kalwani Property to the west

19

http://www.egplanning.org/environmental/silverado-village/index.asp

of 29

RESOLUTION NO. February 6, 2014

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ELK GROVE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELK GROVE CERTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE

SILVERADO VILLAGE PROJECT INCLUDING ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

AND APPROVE A SPECIAL PLANNING AREA FOR THE SILVERADO VILLAGE PROJECT

AND APPROVE A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR SUBDIVISION

LAYOUT FOR THE SILVERADO VILLAGE PROJECT SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PROJECT NO. EG-11-046

APN: 127-0010-002, 017, 040, 104, 105, & 106 WHEREAS, the Planning Department of the City of Elk Grove received an application on

November 4, 2011 from Silverado Homes dba Vintara Holdings, LLC (the “Applicant”) requesting establishment of a Special Planning Area, approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map, and establishment if a Development Agreement for the Silverado Village Project (the ”Project”); and

WHEREAS, the proposed Project is located on real property in the incorporated portions

of the City of Elk Grove more particularly described as APNs: 127-0010-002, 017, 040, 104, 105, & 106; and

WHEREAS, the Project qualifies as a project under the California Environmental Quality

Act (CEQA), Public Resource Code §§21000 et seq.; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 2013, the City released a Notice of Preparation for an EIR for

the Project; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2013, the City released a Notice of Availability for the Draft

EIR and the 45-day comment period was from September 27, 2013 through November 11, 2013; and

WHEREAS, forty-eight written comments on the Draft EIR were received and they do not

alter the conclusions of the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Department considered the Project request pursuant to the General Plan, Title 23 of the Elk Grove Municipal Code (Zoning Code), Citywide Design Guidelines, and all other applicable State and local regulations; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing as required by law to consider all of the information presented by staff, information presented by the Applicant, and public testimony presented in writing and at the meeting.

20

skyles

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

skyles

Typewritten Text

of 29

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Elk Grove

recommends that the City Council certify EIR for the Project based upon the following finding: CEQA Finding: The Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City. Evidence: Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Project. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Draft EIR, which initiated the environmental review process for the Project, was distributed to Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public on January 25, 2013. The 30-day NOP comment period was from January 25, 2013 through February 26, 2013. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was released September 27, 2013. The 45-day comment period was from September 27, 2013 through November 11, 2013. The comment period allows Responsible Agencies, interested parties, and the public to submit comments in regards to the adequacy of the Draft EIR. The NOA specified that comments regarding the Draft EIR may be made in writing to the Planning Department or at a public meeting, which was held before the Planning Commission on November 7, 2013. The Draft EIR has identified the following environmental issue areas as having potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Project:


In summary, while the majority of potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Project would be less than significant or would be reduced to less than significant after imposing the mitigation measures identified in the DEIR, two significant and unavoidable impacts were identified. The significant and unavoidable impacts identified were:


• Impact 3.12-2: Potential to conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy

establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system: Freeways. The Project’s potential to result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with State highways is described in Section 3.12 of the DEIR.

As mentioned, the public comment period on the Draft EIR closed on November 11, 2013. In addition to the verbal comments provided at the November 7, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, 48 written comments were received by the City. Staff has prepared responses to each of these comments and documented them in the draft Final EIR, included as Attachment 2 of the February 20, 2014 Planning Commission staff report. None of the comments alter or impact

21

of 29

the analysis or conclusions presented in the Draft EIR. Substantial revisions to the EIR and recirculation of the document are not necessary.

AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Elk Grove recommends City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the Silverado Village Special Planning Area and rezoning the Project site into the Silverado Village Special Planning Area, as described in Exhibit A and B, based upon the following findings: Establishment of Special Planning Area Finding #1: The proposed SPA is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan. Evidence #1: The proposed Silverado Village SPA provides an opportunity to develop the subject property while preserving the wetland features that are present on the property. The density of the proposed land plan is consistent with policy CAQ-7 of the General Plan, which provides opportunities for clustering development in order to preserve natural features. The overall proposed density and intensity of uses is consistent with allowed density and intensity of land uses provided on the General Plan Land Use Map. Proposed uses for the site are consistent with the allowed uses allowed through General Plan Policy LU-3. Therefore, the proposed SPA is consistent with the goals and polices of the General Plan. Finding #2: That the proposed SPA meets the requirements set forth in EGMC Section 23.16.100. Evidence #2: The proposed SPA includes all of the mandatory components identified in EGMC Section 23.16.100.D, including, but not limited to, list of permitted uses, particularly in the Village 3 area which provides opportunities for development of a lodge and clubhouse, providing local retail uses for residents in the age-restricted village; performance and development standards for development in all three proposed villages; a legal description for the property; and a listing of reasons for establishment of the SPA. Finding #3: The area included within the SPA zone has one (1) or more unusual environmental, historical, architectural, land use mixtures, or other specified significant features which justify the adoption of the SPA zone. Evidence #3: The site of the proposed SPA includes extensive wetlands which will be preserved consistent with the approved 404 Permit for the Project. The proposed SPA will allow for the clustering of development to facilitate this wetland preservation. Additionally, the proposed SPA facilitates the unique development proposed in the Village 3 area through development standards and land use mix that cannot be satisfied through the City’s standard zoning regulations. Further, the presence of trees along the shared property line with development to the west, along with concerns expressed by area residents and stakeholders, requires the establishment of unique development standards, such as alternative minimum lot depths, requirements for side lot lines to match those in the adjacent development, and restrictions on development of two story homes. These special requirements are best implemented through the adoption of a SPA. Finding #4: The features cannot be adequately protected by the adoption of any existing standard zone regulation. Evidence #4: The protection of trees along the shared property line with development to the west, resident and stakeholder concerns, and the preservation of on-site wetlands through the implementation of the General Plan clustering provisions cannot, together, be adequately implemented through existing standard zoning regulations. For example, the City’s standards for

22

of 29

single family residential lots do not provide flexibility for lot depth such that the trees along the shared property line could be adequately protected.

AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Elk Grove recommends City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Project, subject to the draft conditions of approval contained in Exhibit C as illustrated in Exhibit D, based upon the following findings: Tentative Subdivision Map Finding: None of the findings (a) through (g) below in Section 66474 of the California Government Code that require a City to deny approval of a tentative map apply to this project.

a. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.

b. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

c. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. d. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause

substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

f. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

g. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements will conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

Evidence: Findings (a) through (g) in Section 66474 of the California Government Code do not apply to the project.

a. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the General Plan for the City. Specifically, the design and density of development provides, implements, and is consistent with the allowed density and intensity for the site as provided on the General Plan Land Use Map. Further, the configuration of development is supported by General Plan Policy CAQ-7, which allows for clustering of development.

b. The design and improvement is consistent with the General Plan as the density and intensity of development proposed is consistent with that specifically allowed under the General Plan Land Use Plan.

c. The Project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

d. The Project proposes the development of 660 residential units, along with future development of a lodge/clubhouse with assisted living facility. The ultimate gross density of the Project is 2.87 dwelling units per area. The General Plan identified the site for future development at an average density of 5.14 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the Project is less dense than allowed under the General Plan. Furthermore, all proposed lots meet the applicable development standards and will be adequately served by the proposed and conditioned public services and infrastructure.

e. The Project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project.

f. The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems based upon the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project including potential issues related to prior uses of the Project site.

23

of 29

g. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large as demonstrated by review of the Project by the City’s Public Works Department.

Design Review Finding #1: The proposed Project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, specific plan provisions, special planning area provisions, Citywide design guidelines, and improvement standards adopted by the City. Evidence #1: As previously mentioned, the Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the proposed subdivision is consistent with the requirements of the proposed SPA. The proposed Project utilizes a modified grid street system with limited cul-de-sacs, furthering provision 3.A.2.2 of the Citywide Design Guidelines. The primary residential street through the Project (Silverado Drive) utilizes separated sidewalks as provided in provision 3.A.2.4.d and the City’s improvement standards. Finding #2: The proposed Project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation. Evidence #2: The design of the Project includes extensive public trails and pedestrian paths consistent with provision 3.A.2.5 of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Trails Master Plan, which in providing alternative mobility opportunities for residents will address potential vehicular impacts. Key pedestrian crossings are conditioned to include enhanced paving as provided in provision 3.A.2.7. Pedestrian connections from the neighborhood to external streets are provided in all three proposed villages as provided in provision 3.A.2.9. Finding #3: For residential subdivision design review applications, the residential subdivision is well integrated with the City’s street network, creates unique neighborhood environments, reflects traditional architectural styles, and establishes a pedestrian friendly environment. Evidence #3: As previously mentioned, the Project utilizes a modified grid street system that connects to existing major roadways at logical points. The design creates several unique environments through the layout of lots around the proposed detention basin and the configuration of the age-restricted development in Village 3. The Project includes extensive public trails and pedestrian paths consistent with provision 3.A.2.5 of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Trails Master Plan. The architecture of the future proposed homes and lodge/clubhouse buildings will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s Design Guidelines as part of subsequent Design Review.

AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Elk Grove recommends City Council adopt an Ordinance entering into the draft Development Agreement with Vintara Holdings, LLC relative to the Development Known as Silverado Village EG-11-046., as described in Exhibit E, based upon the following findings: Development Agreement Finding #1: The Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies, land uses, and implementation programs and any other applicable specific plans. Evidence #1: The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan as it provides the opportunity to develop the site with residential and commercial uses consistent with the land use plan in the General Plan. Furthermore, the development plan that the Development Agreement implements includes compliance with General Plan Policy CAQ-7,

24

of 29

which allows for density clustering in order to protect natural resources. Resources protected by the Project include wetlands and trees. Finding #2: The Development Agreement is in conformance with the public convenience and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the City as a whole. Evidence #2: The Development Agreement provides a mechanism for development of the Project site consistent with the proposed development plan, providing some assurance to area residents and stakeholders that the Project will be implemented consistent with the proposal. It should be noted that Development Agreements may be amended but the same public hearing process shall be followed as provided for the adoption of the Development Agreement. Finding #3: The Development Agreement will promote the orderly development of property and the preservation of property values. Evidence #3: The Development Agreement promotes orderly development by supporting the proposed Project and ensuring implementation consistent with the proposed development plan. The development plan identifies the necessary water, sewer, storm drainage, and roadway improvements necessary to serve the Project. For example, the Project includes the construction of various on-site improvements to collect, detain, and release stormwater into the existing Whitehouse Creek consistent with existing peak flows. Additionally, the Project includes the upsizing of the Bond Road storm drain system to accommodate a portion of the on-site stormwater flows. This improvement is conditioned to occur concurrently with and as part of the City’s upsizing of the same facility to address existing deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system. By combining these two upsizing activities together, the City is promoting orderly development and the preservation of property values by limiting disturbance to area residences and business to the extent feasible. The foregoing Resolution of the City of Elk Grove was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission on the 20th day of February 2014, by the following vote: AYES: NOES ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:

Sandy Kyles, PLANNING SECRETARY NANCY CHAIRES, CHAIR of the PLANNING COMMISSION

25

Silverado Village SPA

City of Elk Grove, CA Page 1 of 19 FINAL DRAFT: February 20, 2014

Silverado Village Special Planning Area

City of Elk Grove

26

skyles

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT A

skyles

Typewritten Text

skyles

Typewritten Text

skyles

Typewritten Text



Silverado Village SPA – Special Planning Area A. Introduction & Project Overview The Silverado Village SPA is an approximately 230 acre residential community located north of Bond Road and west of Waterman Road. It is comprised of three Villages which are summarized below. Village 1 proposes a maximum of 135 single-family detached homes with a minimum lot size of 6,300 sq. ft. The lots abutting Quail Ranch Estates along the western property line are sized to match the width of these off-site lots to the extent possible as described herein. Figure 1: Location Map

27



Village 2 proposes a maximum of 258 single-family detached homes with a minimum lot size of 5,700 square feet. This neighborhood is well buffered from adjacent properties by Waterman Road and the open space corridor located under the existing power lines on the east, by a 71 acre open space preserve to the north, and by Villages 1 and 3 to the west and south respectively. Village 3 proposes a maximum 267 active adult patio homes on a minimum lot size of 4,600 sq. ft. as measured from the centerline of the internal private streets to the rear property line. These homes will be single-family detached and generally one story given the preferences of the targeted home buyer. Within the “village core” a Lodge Facility is proposed with a maximum of up to 125 units for independent living, assisted living, and/or memory care for seniors. A Clubhouse and Swim Facility are located adjacent to the Lodge within a well-landscaped campus-like setting, and providing a centrally located gathering space that is easily accessed by residents.

Figure 2: Village Core Concept Site Plan

(Note: Site Plan conceptual purposes only and subject to change with final design.) Silverado Village provides several unique features, including a 64.5 acre wetland habitat preserve area on the northern portion, augmented by a 6.5 open space parcel, providing for 71 acres of open space area in the northern portion of the property. An additional 15.7 acre open space is designated between Villages 1 and 2. It will be graded to provide adequate storage for a 100-year storm event, improve flood protection and water quality for urban runoff and will also provide a buffer between villages. The plan also provides 6.1 acres of parkland to meet

Clubhouse

Swim Facility

Lodge Facility

Outdoor Patio

28



the needs of residents living in the standard single family housing proposed by Villages 1 and 2, as well as an extensive trail system that can be used by on-site and off-site residents. B. Reasons for Establishment of an SPA 1. Overview The enabling legislation granting authority to prepare, process, adopt and implement a Special Planning Area (SPA) is defined by Elk Grove Municipal Code Section 23.16.100. This SPA document is regulatory in nature and serves as zoning for the project site. Development plans, subdivision maps, and site plans for the project must be consistent to both the SPA and the City of Elk Grove General Plan. Consistent with the City of Elk Grove Zoning Code, this SPA was initiated by the project applicant and considered for approval by the City Council. The proposed Silverado Village project has significant environmental features and land use mixtures that justify the placement of the project site within the SPA land use zone. 2. Objectives Promoted by SPA: A summary of the Objectives promoted by the Silverado Village are summarized below and provide the basis for the findings made by the City:

a. Consistency with General Plan: The Silverado SPA is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives to the City’s General Plan and implements the land use plan. The northerly portion of the project site (80± acres) is designated for Rural Residential and the SPA proposes open space and park uses. The southerly 150± acres of the site is designated for 146± acres of Low Density Residential (LDR) (4.1-7.0 du/ac) and 4± acres of Commercial/Office/ Multi-Family (C/O/MF). The LDR designated area allows for a range of 598 to 1,022 units and the SPA proposes 660. The C/O/MF area is shifted to the middle of Village 3 to allow for a Senior Lodge & Clubhouse.

b. Compatibility with adjacent Neighborhoods: The adjoining Silverado

Village 1 proposes lot sizes that are consistent with the existing RD-5 neighborhoods located immediately to the west (Quail Ranch Estates). Village 1 shall be designed to be compatible with the western adjacent neighborhood as provided within this SPA.

c. Respect the Site’s existing Natural Features: The SPA designates 71

acres (31% of site) on the northern portion of the property for natural open space. This is comprised of a 64.5 acre preserve area located to protect sensitive wetland and habitat area and an adjoining 6.5 acre open space

29



parcel. A 3.3 acre open space parcel is also designated under the existing power lines. Additionally, A 15.7 acre open space/detention basin parcel and a 0.6 acre open space/drainage outfall parcel are designated between Villages 1 and 2, which will be re-graded to improve flood protection and capture urban runoff. This basin and outfall will be allowed to naturalize and will provide a visual amenity and buffer between neighborhoods. Lastly, a 3.4 acre open space parcel is provided east of Village 3 under the existing power lines. Considered together, 94.0 acres or 41% of the project site is designated for open space uses.

d. Creation of a unique age-restricted community. Village 3 proposes

several unique housing product types that could not be accommodated by standard residential zoning. The single-family detached patio homes are placed on small lots and served by narrow private streets, which is appropriate due to the low traffic volumes experienced with similar senior communities. Pedestrian paseos are placed within Village 3 providing off-street walkways that connect to the Village Core located in the center of this village. The mix of uses proposed in this core area will provide a multitude of amenities and unique gathering destination for the community’s residents.

3. Purpose of the Silverado SPA The Silverado SPA provides for a greater mixture of land uses in this area than could otherwise be permitted under the standard land use zones of Title 23 of the City of Elk Grove Municipal Code.

a. The Silverado Village SPA along with the City of Elk Grove General Plan and Municipal Code shall regulate zoning and land use for the Silverado Village project. All existing City land use policies, development standards, and roadway improvement standards shall remain in effect except as provided for in this SPA document. In instances where this SPA is different or otherwise contrary to the other development standards, or codes of the City of Elk Grove, the SPA shall prevail and be the controlling document for the project. Where this SPA does not discuss a particular topic, the City’s existing zoning shall apply.

b. The SPA delineates the development plan for the project and addresses

associated planning issues. 4. Development Standards & Entitlements The Silverado SPA does not, in and of itself, entitle any specific development. Rather, it sets up specific development standards and criteria for future development. Successive approvals from the City and other jurisdictional agencies and service providers are necessary, including but not limited to, Tentative Map approval, Final Map approval and recordation, Improvement Plan

30



review and approval, Grading Permits, encroachment permits, Design Review (as required by Section 23.1.080 (Design Review), Building Permits, and other approvals permits, and licenses.

C. Permitted Uses and Development Standards by Village 1. Village 1:

Village 1 shall be consistent with the RD-5 Zoning designation as defined in Title 23 of the City of Elk Grove Municipal Code. a. Village 1 - List of permitted uses:

i. Permitted uses as allowed by the City of Elk Grove RD-5 Zone.

b. Village 1 - Development Standards: i. Except as otherwise provided, minimum lot size of 6,300 square feet and

typical dimensions of 60’ wide x 105’ deep measured at the appropriate front, rear, and side yard building setback to ensure product fit. Irregular lots (as defined in the Zoning Code) and those special conditions described in this SPA will vary from the typical dimensions.

ii. Front, side and rear yard setbacks shall be consistent with the RD-5

zone, unless otherwise excepted herein.

iii. Except as provided in section c.iii below, the maximum allowed height shall be:

1. Thirty feet (30’) for primary structures; and 2. Sixteen feet (16’) for accessory structures, or as otherwise

regulated by EGMC Section 23.46.040. c. Village 1 - Site Specific Development Standards & Design

Guidelines:

i. Lots abutting the western boundary adjacent to Quail Ranch Estates shall have lot widths matching the adjacent off-site lots to the extent possible. These lots may measure less than 100’ deep provided they comply with the minimum lot size requirement, with the objective being to protect existing trees along the property line or on adjacent property to the extent feasible.

ii. Minimum rear yard setback for the primary dwelling for lots adjacent to

Quail Ranch Estates shall be twenty (20’) feet. Deviations to a minimum of fifteen (15’) feet may be approved through Master Home Plan Design Review when lot width reductions are required under section iv below. Accessory structures shall comply with the development standards of the Citywide Code.

31



iii. Lots abutting Quail Ranch Estates shall be limited to single story homes.

iv. A solid masonry wall a minimum of six (6’) feet in height shall be constructed at the westerly property line abutting Quail Ranch Estates. The wall shall be designed to minimize potential impacts to off-site trees. Potential solutions include, but are not limited to, pier foundations or modifications in lot depth as provided in section i above. Final design shall be to the satisfaction of the Planning Director after consultation with the City Arborist.

v. A pedestrian only connection with Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA)

shall be extended 110’ from the terminus of Bob White Court located in Quail Ranch Estates to the interior street within Village 1. “Knockdown” bollards shall be placed to prevent non-emergency vehicular access. The Access Easement shall be 42’ wide with a concrete walkway not less than 5’ wide. The easement area shall be landscaped comparable to the trail system within the balance of the community and shall be maintained by CCSD. See additional discussion in section D (Trail and Pedestrian Connectivity) below.

vi. Lots abutting the detention area and parks (i.e., lot 99) shall have rear

yard fence/wall designs that enable views of the open space areas while providing security and privacy for the homeowners. One allowed design includes a masonry block wall bottom with a tubular steel or wrought iron top. Wood fences at these locations are prohibited. Wall/fence design shall comply with the development standards in EGMC Chapter 23.52.

32



2. Village 2 Village 2 shall be consistent with the RD-5 Zoning designation as defined in Title 23 of the City of Elk Grove Municipal Code. a. Village 2 - List of permitted uses

i. Permitted uses as allowed by the City of Elk Grove RD-5 Zone.

b. Village 2 - Development Standards

i. Minimum lot size of 5,775 square feet with typical dimensions of 55’ wide x 105’ deep measured at the appropriate front, rear and side yard building setback to ensure product fit. Irregular lots (as defined in the Zoning Code) will vary from the typical dimensions.

ii. Front, side and rear yard setbacks will be consistent with the RD-5 zone, unless otherwise excepted herein.

iii. The maximum allowed height shall be: 1. Thirty feet (30’) for primary structures; and 2. Sixteen feet (16’) for accessory structures, or as otherwise

regulated by EGMC Section 23.46.040.

c. Village 2 - Site Specific Development Standards & Design Guidelines

i. Traffic circle is designated for intersection of Silverado Drive and A Street with a thirty (30’) foot interior radius allowing for fire truck turn access. Detailed landscape plans, consistent with the Zoning Code and Improvement Standards, shall be submitted with the preparation of improvement plans for this roadway.

ii. A 10’ paved trail with 2’ shoulders and a 5’ unpaved equestrian trail shall

be provided on the north side of Silverado Drive, within a minimum 35’ wide landscape corridor lot, allowing a publically accessible east-west connection through Silverado Village.

iii. A 10’ paved trail with 2’ shoulders shall be provided along the eastern

edge of the open space/detention basin parcel within a lot, allowing public connectivity for the community at large to the east/west trail and the north Park site. See additional discussion in section D (Trail and Pedestrian Connectivity) below.

33



3. Village 3 Village 3 is an age-restricted gated community with private streets and contains two unique housing product types that do not fit within the City of Elk Grove’s existing zoning categories, and are therefore defined in detail herein. The first housing type is the higher intensity “Village Core” area, which will provide a lodge facility for seniors in one or more buildings, plus recreational amenities. The second housing type is the “Patio Homes” which are located around the “Village Core” allowing convenient access for the residents to the “Village Core” area.

a. Village Core

i. A Village Core is designated at the center of Village 3 which corresponds to the Commercial/Office/Multi-family designated on the City’s General Plan (See Figure 3: Village 3 Village Core Area). The Village Core area is planned for recreational amenities including a clubhouse and pool with the balance planned for the lodge and residential use. The SPA process allows the re-arrangement of land uses within the SPA provided they are found to be consistent with the General Plan. This Village Core area shall be extensively landscaped and shall provide a central green space and gathering area for residents. Shifting this land use to the center of the neighborhood significantly improves the land plan, allowing for more convenient walking distances from the surrounding patio homes, and it will allow the Senior Lodge to be buffered from the adjacent land uses to the east and Bond Road to the south.

ii. The Village Core Area is intended to provide flexibility in the final design

of the Senior Lodge, Clubhouse, Recreation and Swim Facility. The Village Core area may be expanded into the contiguous patio home area in order to allow for more recreation amenities and/or a larger lodge facility, not to exceed 125 units. Such expansion, as consistent with this SPA, would reduce the number of patio homes proposed and would be subject to the review and approval by City of Elk Grove.

34



Figure 3: Village 3 Village Core Area

b. Village 3 - List of Permitted Uses

i. Village Center – Lodge Facility: 1. Independent Living Apartments 2. Assisted Living Apartments 3. Specialized Care Units (memory care for Alzheimer’s and dementia

residents.) 4. Restaurant 5. General retail use, less than 10,000 square feet, Pharmacy or other

similar retail 6. Retail/Office space 7. Beauty Salon 8. Crafts room, Media room, meeting room 9. Common Kitchen 10. Common Laundry room 11. Doctor’s office, exam room, nursing station 12. Leasing and Real Estate Sales Office 13. Services consistent with the nature of the development

ii. Village Center – Clubhouse, Recreation & Swim Facility:

1. Bistro/Café with full kitchen facilities 2. Dining and sitting areas, meeting rooms, recreation & gaming rooms 3. Swimming Pool, indoor or outdoor, and accompanying structure and

equipment 4. Spa or hot tub 5. Fitness room 6. Changing room and showers 7. Offices

35



8. Space for other 3rd party services 9. Outdoor Recreational Amenities (e.g. bocce, croquet, putting green,

tennis courts, etc.)

iii. Patio Homes: 1. Single family homes 2. Paseos (pathways) with appropriate easements 3. Exclusive use areas 4. Community gardens or other common areas

c. Village 3 Development Standards

i. The Silverado Village SPA utilizes unique planning, design and development standards to allow an innovative project design that cannot be accommodated by the strict application of the City’s existing planning regulations and engineering standards.

ii. Table 1 below outlines the site development standards for the Cottage

lots (patio Homes).

Table 1: Village 3 Site Development Standards – Patio Homes Development Standard Patio Homes

Minimum Lot Area 4,600 sf. min.1

Maximum Density 8 .0 du/ac.

Front & Side Setbacks2

To garage door 18 ft.

To front living area 12 ft.

To covered porch 10 ft.

Street side (second frontage) setback 12 ft.

Interior side setback 5 ft. 3

Rear Setback

To living area 10 ft.

Lot Dimensions

Width 50 ft. 4

Corner lot 60 ft.

Depth 92.5 ft.5

Height Limit

Primary Structures 30 ft.

Notes (Table 1): 1) Lot measurements shall be from centerline of the private street to the rear property line.

36



2) Front setbacks are measured from back of curb, and side setbacks are measured from side property line. Roof eaves or overhangs, bay windows or fireplaces may project up to 2’ into the front, side or rear yard setbacks.

3) Side patio exclusive use areas may extend up to 2’ past the adjoining side yard property line, creating an exclusive use patio area encroaching onto the adjoining lot.

4) Minimum lot width is measured at the front or rear setback line to ensure product will fit lot, and frontage dimension at back of curb or rear lot line may be less. Patio homes may have driveways located off of a 20 ft. shared private drive.

5) Lot depth measured from the private street centerline is 92.5’, from the back of curb is 79.5’, and may be reduced based on plot plan review provided setback standards are met.

Table 2 below outlines the site development standards for Lodge & Clubhouse area.

Table 2: Village 3 Site Development Standards – Village Core Area Development Standard Village Core Area

Minimum Lot Area No minimum

Maximum Density 30.0 du/ac.

Front & Side Setbacks

Building to Building 20 ft. 1

Street side setback 15 ft.2

Interior side setback 15 ft. 3

Lot Dimensions

Depth No minimum

Height Limit

Primary Structures 48 ft.

Notes (Table 2): 1) Setback is for building to building for any habitable structure including the setback of the lodge

building to a single family patio home. Entry structures, trellises, awnings, patio covers, etc. are exempt from the set-back requirement.

2) Parking Bays are allowed to encroach into the side-yard setback area, but no closer than 5’ to a building.

3) There is no minimum setback to property lines within the Village Core area; however building setbacks to property lines outside the Village Core area (i.e. to the P/Ls of the Patio Homes) shall be a minimum of 15’.

37



Figure 4: Typical Cottage Lot Plot Plan

d. Village 3 - Site Specific Development Standards

i. Internal Roadway Design Standards:

a. The proposed senior community will generate significantly less traffic than that of a standard residential development. Retirees do not commute to work nor do they drive their children to school. The proposed street system follows a simple efficient grid pattern with narrow streets and off street trails and paseos promoting walk-ability within the Village.

b. Village 3 will be a private, gated community. All internal streets

shall be private. Wet utilities (e.g. sewer, water, storm drainage) shall be located under the street as allowed by a blanket easement, and a 10’ PUE shall be provided behind the curb for dry utilities (e.g. phone, cable, electric, etc.). The streets shall be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access.

ii. Parking Standards:

a. Non-covered resident and guest parking shall include 2.25 spaces

for each home to be provided by driveway aprons and other dedicated parking spaces spread throughout the village.

b. The Lodge area shall provide, at a minimum, 1 parking space for

every 1.5 living units.

38



c. Each unit shall provide two garage parking spaces. Garages shall

be designed as side-by-side. e. Street Standards:

i. A simple, grid pattern street system is required for Village 3 to

provide access to the village core and patio homes.

ii. The minimum offset between intersections for the internal private streets shall be 75’. This is justified due to the low traffic volumes and low travel speeds anticipated for the project.

iii. A reduced street section is permitted for Village 3. The Internal

streets shall measure 26’ back of curb to back of curb, with 2.5’ curb and gutter, providing 21’ of pavement. Modified vertical and rolled curb designs shall be allowed. Curbside parking is not required.

Figure 5: Street Section for Internal 26’ Private Lanes

iv. Curbside sidewalks are not required internal to Village 3 except at

the main project entry from Silverado Drive to the Lodge & Clubhouse. Pedestrian walkways or paseos are provided within the community as provided for in the Landscape Standards section below.

v. The minimum back of curb return radius for internal streets is 30’

and has been designed to allow fire truck turn movements.

vi. A 20’ shared private driveway may be utilized at 90 degree elbows to provide access to lots. The driveway shall not be longer than 120’ in length.

vii. The 90 degree streets located within Village 3 may eliminate the

typical “bulge” at the elbow but shall provide an inside back-of-curb (BOC) radius of 30’ and outside BOC radius of 56’ to accommodate fire truck turn movements.

39



Figure 6: Design Detail for 90 Degree Elbow

f. Open Space Standards

i. Open Space areas are key features included in the design of Village 3. These features include paseos, mini-parks, common areas and recreational amenities.

ii. The open space areas shall be designed for the enjoyment of both

the lodge and patio homes residents.

iii. The open space areas shall be an integral part of the Village 3 design concept and serves to foster physical and social connectivity for the residents, by providing viable and walk-able trails to key destination points such as the Village Core area as well as connection to the trail system outside the Village gates. Additionally, the paseo system shall include gathering areas, reflections points, and resting spots interspersed throughout the paseo network.

iv. Due to the nature of the open space design as part of the

comprehensive planning of Village 3, there are no minimum opens space area requirements for Village 3.

g. Landscape Standards

i. Due to the extensive green space and recreation amenities

provided on-site within Village 3 (e.g. the Clubhouse, swim facility, corner community gardens, etc.) CCSD has determined that

40



Village will have met its Quimby parkland dedication obligation, based on the Senior Community rate.

ii. Interior lots shall be designed such that traditional rear yard fencing

is eliminated allowing for a 4’ meandering paseo and enhanced landscaping within the paseo. The homeowners association (HOA) will have a use and maintenance easement for this area. This allows residents to visit with each other and to walk over to the Lodge & Clubhouse, and provides “eyes” on this internal green space. This landscaping shall be maintained by the HOA. See additional discussion in section D (Trail and Pedestrian Connectivity) below. The inclusion of the paseo system eliminates the need for sidewalks within the private streets.

Figure 7: Paseo Illustrative

iii. Where private rear yards are present, the developer is permitted to include the private rear yard area within the HOA maintenance easement. As such, residents will have more flexibility in the landscaping of these rear yard areas.

iv. At selected corner lots, the builder shall install “mini-parks” to

provide a landscape amenity within close proximity to the residents of the cottage lots. Design of these corner mini-parks may vary; by example, to include such features as community gardens (vegetable or flower garden areas for residents to tend), shaded sitting areas, potting sheds, fountains, doggy parks, bocce courts, etc. These lots are shown as lots “P”, “X”, “Y”, and “Z” on the proposed tentative map.

41



Figure 8: View of internal “back-to-back” paseo walk

v. Pedestrian connections between Village 3 and the surrounding community and the trails network shall be provided at multiple locations along the perimeter of the Village. The design of the connections shall integrate the paseo system provided within Village 3 to the satisfaction of the City of Elk Grove. Specifically, connections shall be provided at the following locations:

a. Within Lot “P” connecting to Silverado Drive; b. At the pedestrian/emergency access point between lots 160 & 161 providing convenient access to Bond Road as well as the future Commercial to the east; c. At lots 137 & 138 connecting to the Lot “F” trail; and d. Between lots 12 & 13, extending the east-west paseo trail to connect to sidewalk along Silverado Drive.

D. Trails and Pedestrian Connectivity The project developer shall construct the following trail and pedestrian improvements concurrent with the respective adjoining street improvement phase of development. Development within the Silverado Village SPA area shall provide trails and other pedestrian amenities consistent with the following:

Eskaton Village in Roseville, California

42



1. An off-street trail, consisting of a 10-foot paved trail along Silverado

Drive from Bond Road to Lot “K” park. 2. An off-street trail, consisting of a 10-foot paved trail with 2-foot

decomposed granite shoulder (each side) and 6-foot landscape buffer east side along Silverado Drive and M Drive from lot “K” (park) to lot “G” (park).

3. An off-street trail, consisting of a 10-foot paved trail with 2-foot decomposed granite shoulder (each side), a 4-foot landscape buffer south side and an equestrian trail on the north side (consisting of a five foot wide trail with five foot buffer from the pedestrian trail and 2-foot buffer from the adjoining lot) from the western project boundary through lot “G” (park) to Waterman Road.

4. An enhanced pedestrian walk from Bob White Court to Lot “K” (park), following I & J streets, consisting of a separated walk on the north and west sides of the roads with a 6-foot landscape buffer and 5-foot walk.

5. Paseos at Lot “W’ and Bob White Court consisting of a 10-foot wide paved area with landscaping.

6. Internal Paseos within Village 3 that consist of a 4-foot wide meandering walk as previously described in section C.3.g (landscape standards) of this document.

7. Enhanced pedestrian cross-walks at the following intersections where trails cross roads or other enhanced pedestrian connections are provided. “Enhanced pedestrian crosswalks” shall consist of colored pavers, colored and stamped concrete or asphalt, or other such enhancement approved by the City of Elk Grove, with pedestrian crosswalk striping per City of Elk Grove standards. The project developer shall construct enhanced pedestrian crosswalks at the following locations:

a. M Street and Silverado Drive b. M Street west of Lot W (paseo) c. A Street north of Lot D (trail corridor) d. G Street at I street, north side e. I Street at B Street, west side f. Silverado Drive at B Street/Village Center Lane, all four sides g. Silverado Drive at A Street, all four sides h. Silverado Drive at U Street/Lot W (paseo), north side i. U Street at O Street, north side j. U Street at R Street, north side k. U Street at V Street, north side l. Lot F trail at Silverado Drive, west side m. Silverado Drive at Waterman Road, north side (connecting to

trail head at Sheldon and Waterman project)

43



Legal Description: A legal description of the Silverado Village SPA area shall be provided prior to final City Council Hearing to approve the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Silverado Village Community and will be attached to this document.

44

o

f 29

Exhi

bit B

Re

zone

Exh

ibit

Subj

ect A

PNs:

127

-001

0-00

2, 0

17, 0

40, 1

04, 1

05, &

106

Exist

ing

Zoni

ng

Prop

osed

Sub

ject

Pro

per

ty

Sub

ject

Pro

per

ty

Silv

era

do

Villa

ge

Spec

ial P

lann

ing

Are

a (S

VSP

A)

45

skyles

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT B

skyles

Typewritten Text

o

f 29

Exhi

bit C

Dr

aft C

ondi

tions

of A

ppro

val

EG-1

1-04

6 –

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

Tent

ativ

e Su

bdiv

ision

Map

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

On-

Goi

ng

1.

The

dev

elop

men

t a

pp

rove

d b

y th

is a

ctio

n is

for

a T

enta

tive

Sub

div

ision

Ma

p t

o cr

eate

the

fol

low

ing,

as

illust

rate

d i

n th

e at

tach

ed E

xhib

it D

(he

rein

afte

r th

e “P

roje

ct”)

and

as m

odifi

ed o

r con

diti

oned

by

thes

e co

nditi

ons o

f ap

pro

val:

•

393

lots

for s

tand

ard

sing

le fa

mily

in V

illage

s 1 a

nd 2

, col

lect

ivel

y •

267

lots

for a

ge

rest

ricte

d c

otta

ges i

n V

illage

3

• 2

lots

for t

he a

ge re

stric

ted

lod

ge/c

lub

hous

e •

9 lo

ts fo

r op

en sp

ace

/tra

il co

rrid

or

• 2

lots

for p

ark

s •

1 lo

t for

det

entio

n a

rea

/ba

sin

• 14

lots

for l

and

sca

pe

lots

and

pa

seos

•

1 lo

t for

priv

ate

driv

e •

Ded

ica

tions

for

pub

lic ri

ghts

-of-w

ay

inte

rna

l to

the

pro

ject

and

alo

ng B

ond

Ro

ad

, Wa

term

an

Roa

d,

Dev

iatio

ns f

rom

the

ap

pro

ved

pla

ns s

hall

be

revi

ewed

by

the

City

for

sub

sta

ntia

l co

mp

lianc

e a

nd m

ay

req

uire

am

end

men

t by

the

ap

pro

pria

te h

earin

g b

ody.

On

Goi

ng

Pla

nnin

g

2.

This

act

ion

doe

s no

t re

lieve

the

Ap

plic

ant

of

the

oblig

atio

n to

com

ply

with

all

cod

es, l

aw

s, st

atu

tes,

reg

ula

tions

, and

pro

ced

ures

. O

n G

oing

Pl

ann

ing

3.

The

Ap

plic

ant

/Ow

ner,

or S

ucce

ssor

s in

Int

eres

t (h

erei

nafte

r re

ferre

d t

o a

s th

e A

pp

lica

nt),

sha

ll ho

ld

harm

less

th

e C

ity,

its

Cou

ncil

Mem

ber

s, its

Pl

ann

ing

Com

miss

ion,

offi

cers

, ag

ents

, em

plo

yees

, and

rep

rese

nta

tives

fro

m li

ab

ility

for

any

a

wa

rd,

da

ma

ges,

cost

s a

nd f

ees

incu

rred

by

the

City

and

/or

aw

ard

ed t

o a

ny

pla

intif

f in

a

n a

ctio

n ch

alle

ngin

g th

e va

lidity

of

th

is A

pp

lica

tion

or

any

en

viro

nmen

tal

or o

ther

doc

umen

tatio

n re

late

d t

o a

pp

rova

l of

thi

s A

pp

licat

ion.

A

pp

lica

nt fu

rther

agr

ees t

o p

rovi

de

a d

efen

se fo

r the

City

in a

ny su

ch a

ctio

n.

On

Goi

ng

Pla

nnin

g

46

skyles

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT C

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

4.

Exce

pt a

s ot

herw

ise s

pec

ified

or p

rovi

ded

for o

n th

e Te

nta

tive

Sub

div

ision

Ma

p o

r in

thes

e co

nditi

ons,

the

Proj

ect

sha

ll co

nfor

m t

o th

e d

evel

opm

ent

sta

nda

rds

and

d

esig

n re

qui

rem

ents

pro

vid

ed i

n th

e C

ity o

f El

k G

rove

Mun

icip

al

Cod

e (E

GM

C),

spec

ifica

lly in

clud

ing

but

not

lim

ited

to th

e fo

llow

ing:

• Th

e Si

lver

ad

o V

illage

Sp

ecia

l Pla

nnin

g A

rea

(SV

SPA

) •

The

Elk

Gro

ve Z

onin

g C

ode

(Titl

e 23

of t

he E

GM

C)

• EG

MC

Cha

pte

r 19.

12 (T

ree

Pres

erva

tion

and

Pro

tect

ion)

•

EGM

C C

hap

ter 1

4.10

(Wa

ter E

ffici

ent L

and

sca

pe

Req

uire

men

ts)

• C

ityw

ide

Des

ign

Gui

del

ines

On

Goi

ng

Pla

nnin

g Pu

blic

Wor

ks

5.

The

Ap

plic

ant

sha

ll d

esig

n a

nd c

onst

ruct

all

imp

rove

men

ts in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve Im

pro

vem

ent S

tand

ard

s, a

s fu

rther

con

diti

oned

her

ein,

and

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

. All

stre

et im

pro

vem

ents

sha

ll in

clud

e ve

rtica

l cur

b a

nd

gutt

er,

exce

pt

ad

jace

nt t

o lo

ts w

here

fro

nt-o

n re

siden

tial

acc

ess

is p

rovi

ded

, in

w

hich

ca

se s

treet

im

pro

vem

ents

sha

ll in

clud

e ro

lled

cur

b a

nd g

utte

r. Sp

ecifi

c lo

catio

ns o

n m

edia

n(s)

tha

t re

qui

re e

mer

genc

y ve

hicl

e a

cces

s w

ill b

e ev

alu

ate

d d

urin

g re

view

and

acc

epta

nce

of th

e Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

. Pu

blic

se

wer

, w

ate

r, a

nd

othe

r ut

ility

infra

stru

ctur

e sh

all

be

des

igne

d

and

co

nstru

cted

in a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

sta

nda

rds o

f the

ap

pro

pria

te u

tility

.

On

Goi

ng

Pub

lic W

orks

EGW

S SA

SD

SMUD

PG

&E

6.

The

Ap

plic

ant

sha

ll p

ay

all

pla

n ch

eck

fees

, im

pa

ct fe

es, o

r oth

er c

osts

as

req

uire

d

by

the

City

, the

Cos

umne

s C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s D

istric

t (C

CSD

), Sa

cra

men

to A

rea

Se

wer

Dist

rict

(SA

SD),

Sacr

am

ento

Cou

nty

Wa

ter A

genc

y (S

CW

A),

Elk

Gro

ve W

ate

r Se

rvic

e (E

GW

S), o

r oth

er a

genc

ies o

r ser

vice

s pro

vid

ers a

s est

ab

lishe

d b

y la

w.

On-

Goi

ng

Pla

nnin

g Pu

blic

Wor

ks

CC

SD

EGW

S Se

wer

47

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

7.

Ap

pro

val o

f th

is Pr

ojec

t d

oes

not

relie

ve t

he A

pp

lica

nt f

rom

the

req

uire

men

ts o

f su

bse

que

nt p

erm

its a

nd a

pp

rova

ls, in

clud

ing

but

not

lim

ited

to th

e fo

llow

ing:

• M

ast

er h

ome

pla

n d

esig

n re

view

•

Com

mer

cia

l des

ign

revi

ew

• G

rad

ing

Perm

it a

nd Im

pro

vem

ent P

lan

• Fi

nal M

ap

• Bu

ildin

g Pe

rmit

and

Cer

tific

ate

of O

ccup

anc

y •

Sect

ion

404,

401

, 160

2, o

r oth

er S

tate

or F

eder

al e

nviro

nmen

tal p

erm

it •

Req

uire

men

ts o

f th

e Sa

cra

men

to M

etro

pol

itan

Air

Qua

lity

Ma

nage

men

t D

istric

t •

Fire

per

mit

On-

Goi

ng

Pla

nnin

g Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Build

ing

CC

SD

EGW

S Se

wer

Prio

r To

or In

Con

junc

tion

With

Impr

ovem

ent a

nd/o

r Gra

ding

Pla

n A

ppro

val

8.

The

dev

elop

men

t a

pp

rove

d b

y th

is a

ctio

n is

sub

ject

to

the

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g Pr

ogra

m (

MM

RP)

ad

opte

d a

s p

art

of t

he p

roje

ct.

A d

epos

it of

$5

,000

for

mon

itorin

g m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s a

pp

lica

ble

to

this

dev

elop

men

t sh

all

be

pa

id t

o th

e C

ity in

ord

er t

o a

ssur

e M

MRP

com

plia

nce.

If

act

ual C

ity m

onito

ring

cost

s ex

ceed

the

initi

al e

stim

ate

, a re

vise

d e

stim

ate

and

/or s

upp

lem

enta

l bill(

s) w

ill b

e su

bm

itted

to th

e A

pp

lica

nt. I

f act

ual C

ity m

onito

ring

cost

s are

less

tha

n th

e in

itial

es

tima

te,

the

diff

eren

ce w

ill b

e re

fund

ed t

o th

e A

pp

lica

nt.

If

the

Proj

ect

is co

nstru

cted

in

pha

ses

bet

wee

n m

ultip

le p

arti

es,

ad

diti

ona

l d

epos

it(s)

sha

ll b

e re

qui

red

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

the

Pla

nnin

g D

irect

or.

Prio

r to

issua

nce

of

any

pla

ns o

r p

erm

its a

ssoc

iate

d

with

this

pro

ject

, th

e A

pp

lica

nt sh

all

sub

mit

the

dep

osit

to th

e C

ity o

f Elk

G

rove

.

Pla

nnin

g

9.

The

Pla

nnin

g D

ivisi

on

sha

ll b

e no

tifie

d

imm

edia

tely

if

any

p

rehi

stor

ic,

arc

haeo

logi

cal,

or p

ale

onto

logi

cal a

rtifa

ct is

unc

over

ed d

urin

g co

nstru

ctio

n.

All

cons

truct

ion

mus

t st

op a

nd a

n a

rcha

eolo

gist

tha

t m

eets

the

Sec

reta

ry o

f th

e In

terio

r’s

Prof

essio

nal

Qua

lific

atio

ns

Sta

nda

rds

in

pre

hist

oric

or

hi

stor

ical

a

rcha

eolo

gy s

hall

be

reta

ined

to

eva

lua

te t

he f

ind

s a

nd re

com

men

d a

pp

rop

riate

a

ctio

n.

A n

ote

sta

ting

the

ab

ove

sha

ll b

e p

lace

d o

n th

e Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

n Pl

ann

ing

48

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

10.

A

ll co

nstru

ctio

n m

ust

stop

if a

ny h

uma

n re

ma

ins

are

unc

over

ed,

and

the

Cou

nty

Cor

oner

mus

t b

e no

tifie

d a

ccor

din

g to

Sec

tion

7050

.5 o

f C

alif

orni

a’s

Hea

lth a

nd

Safe

ty

Cod

e.

If

the

rem

ain

s a

re

det

erm

ined

to

b

e N

ativ

e A

mer

ica

n,

the

pro

ced

ures

out

lined

in C

EQA

Sec

tion

1506

4.5

(d) a

nd (e

) sha

ll b

e fo

llow

ed.

A n

ote

sta

ting

the

ab

ove

sha

ll b

e p

lace

d o

n th

e Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g

11.

A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pre

pa

re a

nd s

ubm

it a

dra

ina

ge s

tud

y to

the

sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic

Wor

ks a

nd i

n a

ccor

da

nce

with

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve S

torm

Dra

ina

ge M

ast

er P

lan

Imp

rove

men

t Sta

nda

rds,

Gen

era

l Pla

n, a

nd a

ny s

pec

ific,

are

a, o

r ma

ster

pla

ns. T

he

stud

y sh

all

be

pre

pa

red

and

sta

mp

ed b

y a

lice

nsed

civ

il en

gine

er.

Firs

t of G

rad

ing

Perm

it or

Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

Pub

lic W

orks

12.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pre

pa

re a

nd s

ubm

it a

Pos

t-C

onst

ruct

ion

Stor

mw

ate

r Q

ualit

y C

ontro

l Pla

n in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve Im

pro

vem

ent S

tand

ard

s a

nd

mos

t re

cent

ver

sion

of t

he S

torm

wa

ter Q

ualit

y D

esig

n M

anu

al f

or t

he S

acr

am

ento

Re

gion

.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll a

lso

sub

mit

a

sep

ara

te

ma

inte

nanc

e m

anu

al

des

crib

ing

pro

per

ma

inte

nanc

e p

ract

ices

for t

he s

pec

ific

treat

men

t con

trols

to b

e co

nstru

cted

Firs

t of G

rad

ing

Perm

it or

Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

Pub

lic W

orks

13.

Th

e p

ortio

n of

dev

elop

men

t th

at is

pro

pos

ed t

o d

rain

into

the

Bon

d R

oad

sys

tem

sh

all

not

be

imp

rove

d o

r ma

pp

ed w

ith t

he e

xcep

tion

of t

he t

emp

ora

ry fi

re a

cces

s ro

ad

and

any

oth

er n

eces

sary

fa

cilit

ies

for

pub

lic h

ealth

and

sa

fety

pur

pos

es u

ntil

the

dow

nstre

am

Bo

nd

Roa

d

Pip

e Up

sizin

g p

roje

ct

is co

mp

lete

d

and

fu

lly

oper

atio

nal.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

14.

Id

entif

icat

ion

signa

ge is

sued

by

Pub

lic W

orks

sha

ll b

e m

ount

ed b

y th

e A

pp

lica

nt

dur

ing

stre

etlig

ht in

sta

llatio

n in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith th

e a

pp

rove

d p

lans

.

Acc

epta

nce

of

Pub

lic

Imp

rove

men

ts

Pub

lic W

orks

15.

Th

e tra

il p

ortio

n of

Sec

tions

B a

nd B

-1 s

hall

be

conc

rete

with

out

dec

omp

osed

gr

ani

te sh

ould

ers.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

CSD

Pa

rks

16.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll su

bm

it la

ndsc

ap

e a

nd

civi

l im

pro

vem

ent

pla

ns

and

sp

ecifi

catio

ns fo

r tra

ils a

nd p

ase

os to

the

CSD

for r

evie

w a

nd a

pp

rova

l. Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

C

CSD

Pa

rks

17.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

sub

mit

civi

l im

pro

vem

ent

pla

ns a

nd s

pec

ifica

tions

for p

ark

site

s to

CC

SD P

ark

s for

revi

ew a

nd a

pp

rova

l. Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

C

CSD

Pa

rks

49

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

18.

A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll co

nstru

ct

&

inst

all

land

sca

ped

tra

il a

ccor

din

g to

pl

ans

a

nd

spec

ifica

tions

ap

pro

ved

by

the

CSD

in

Lot

AA

, Lo

t D

, Lo

t G

(Pa

rk s

ite),

Lot

H (e

xten

ds s

outh

of p

ark

site

), Lo

t K, L

ot N

, Lot

O, a

nd L

ot W

.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

CC

SD P

ark

s

19.

C

onsis

tent

with

the

Silv

era

do

Villa

ge S

PA, o

pen

vie

w fe

ncin

g co

nsist

ing

of lo

w b

lock

w

all

with

tub

ula

r ste

el u

pp

er p

ortio

n sh

all

be

inst

alle

d o

n a

ll ho

meo

wne

r lot

s d

irect

ly

ab

uttin

g Lo

t J.

W

all

sha

ll b

e lo

cate

d o

n th

e ho

meo

wne

r sid

e of

the

pro

per

ty li

ne

and

hom

eow

ner

sha

ll be

res

pon

sible

for

rep

air

or r

epla

cem

ent.

Fin

al d

esig

n sh

all

be

to t

he s

atisf

act

ion

of t

he P

lann

ing

Dire

ctor

in

cons

ulta

tion

with

CC

SD P

ark

s.

Ma

inte

nanc

e re

spon

sibilit

y fo

r th

e w

all s

hall

be

ass

igne

d t

o th

e ho

meo

wne

r a

nd

sha

ll b

e re

cord

ed o

n th

e su

bje

ct lo

ts in

a fo

rma

t sa

tisfa

ctor

y to

the

City

.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g C

CSD

Pa

rks

20.

Fe

ncin

g a

long

Lot

s W

and

DD

(p

ase

os)

and

Lot

K (

pa

rk)

sha

ll b

e b

lock

wa

ll. W

all

sha

ll b

e lo

cate

d o

n th

e ho

meo

wne

r sid

e of

the

pro

per

ty li

ne a

nd h

omeo

wne

r sha

ll b

e re

spon

sible

for r

epa

ir or

rep

lace

men

t. F

ina

l des

ign

sha

ll b

e to

the

satis

fact

ion

of

the

Pla

nnin

g D

irect

or in

con

sulta

tion

with

CC

SD P

ark

s. M

ain

tena

nce

resp

onsib

ility

for t

he w

all s

hall

be

ass

igne

d to

the

hom

eow

ner a

nd re

cord

ed o

n th

e su

bje

ct lo

ts in

a

form

at s

atis

fact

ory

to th

e C

ity.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g C

CSD

Pa

rks

21.

Th

e w

all

alo

ng th

e Pr

ojec

t bou

nda

ry w

ith Q

uail

Ranc

h (L

ots

66 th

roug

h 84

of V

illage

1A

) sh

all

be

des

igne

d t

o m

inim

ize p

oten

tial

imp

act

s to

off-

site

trees

. P

oten

tial

solu

tions

incl

ude,

but

are

not

lim

ited

to,

pie

r fou

nda

tions

and

/or o

ffset

ting

the

wal

l fro

m t

he e

xist

ing

pro

per

ty l

ine

to t

he e

ast

(Pr

ojec

t sid

e) t

o p

rovi

de

sep

ara

tion

bet

wee

n th

e ex

istin

g tre

es a

nd t

he w

all.

Fin

al d

esig

n sh

all

be

to t

he s

atis

fact

ion

of

the

Pla

nnin

g D

irect

or a

fter

cons

ulta

tion

with

the

City

Arb

orist

. Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

coor

din

ate

th

e d

esig

n w

ith

the

ad

join

ing

pro

per

ty

owne

r a

nd

ad

dre

ss

thei

r co

ncer

ns to

the

exte

nt fe

asib

le.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g C

ity A

rbor

ist

22.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

com

ply

with

all

reco

mm

end

atio

ns o

f th

e C

ity A

rbor

ist a

s d

ocum

ente

d i

n th

e Ja

nua

ry 3

, 20

12 T

ree

Surv

ey,

as

wel

l a

s th

e D

evel

opm

ent

Con

trol M

easu

res i

n EG

MC

Sec

tion

19.1

2.20

0.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g C

ity A

rbor

ist

50

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

23.

Th

e fo

llow

ing

Tree

s of

Loc

al I

mp

orta

nce,

as

iden

tifie

d in

the

Ja

nua

ry 3

, 20

12 T

ree

Surv

ey, a

re a

pp

rove

d fo

r rem

ova

l. S

uch

rem

ova

l sha

ll b

e m

itiga

ted

pur

sua

nt to

the

pro

ced

ures

and

req

uire

men

ts o

f EG

MC

Cha

pte

r 19

.12.

A

ll ot

her

Tree

s of

Loc

al

Imp

orta

nce

iden

tifie

d in

the

Tre

e Su

rvey

are

her

eby

dec

lare

d S

ecur

ed T

rees

and

su

bse

que

nt r

emov

al

sha

ll b

e su

bje

ct t

o fu

rther

miti

gatio

n a

s sp

ecifi

ed i

n EG

MC

C

hap

ter 1

9.12

. Tr

ees a

utho

rized

for r

emov

al:

1, 2

, 4, 6

, 7 o

r 8, 9

, 11

or 1

2, 1

4, 1

5, &

17.

Fu

rther

, th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll co

mp

lete

th

e A

rbor

ist

reco

mm

end

atio

ns

for

pru

ning

/ma

inte

nanc

e of

the

follo

win

g tre

es:

Ma

inte

nanc

e re

qui

red

: 3, 5

, 10,

11

or 1

2, 1

3, 1

8, &

19.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

Pla

nnin

g C

ity A

rbor

ist

24.

A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pro

vid

e m

eand

erin

g tra

il a

nd ir

riga

ted

land

sca

pe

bet

wee

n th

e tra

il a

nd t

he w

all

and

the

tra

il a

nd t

he s

treet

acc

ord

ing

to p

lans

and

sp

ecifi

catio

ns

ap

pro

ved

by

the

CC

SD fo

r Lot

F.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

CC

SD P

ark

s

25.

Pr

ovid

e ut

ility

stub

s in

to

the

pa

rk s

ites

for

wa

ter,

dra

ina

ge,

elec

trica

l, p

hone

and

se

wer

. Lo

catio

ns o

f all

utilit

y se

rvic

e p

oint

s sh

all

be p

ursu

ant

to

pla

ns a

pp

rove

d b

y th

e C

SD.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

CC

SD P

ark

s

26.

A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll p

ay

a

pro

por

tiona

te

sha

re

of

the

cost

to

in

sta

ll a

tra

il cr

ossin

g/cr

ossw

alk

at W

ater

ma

n Ro

ad

and

Silv

era

do

Driv

e.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

CC

SD P

ark

s Pu

blic

Wor

ks

27.

A

pp

lica

nt sh

all

roug

h gr

ad

e p

ark

site

s pur

sua

nt to

pla

ns a

pp

rove

d b

y th

e C

CSD

. Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

C

CSD

Pa

rks

28.

A

ll d

evel

opm

ent

sha

ll b

e se

rvic

ed

by

pub

lic

sew

er

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of

Sacr

am

ento

Are

a S

ewer

Dist

rict.

Ea

ch l

ot w

ith a

sew

age

sou

rce

sha

ll ha

ve a

se

pa

rate

con

nect

ion

to t

he p

ublic

sys

tem

. If

the

re is

mor

e th

an

one

bui

ldin

g on

a

ny lo

t and

the

lot i

s not

pro

pos

ed fo

r sp

lit, t

hen

each

bui

ldin

g on

that

lot s

hall

have

a

sep

ara

te c

onne

ctio

n to

a p

riva

te o

n-sit

e se

wer

line

or S

ASD

pub

lic se

wer

line

.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

SASD

51

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

29.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pre

pa

re a

Sub

div

ision

Lev

el (

Leve

l 3)

sew

er s

tud

y p

rior

to t

he

ap

pro

val

of t

he i

mp

rove

men

t p

lans

. T

he s

tud

y sh

all

be

sub

ject

to

revi

ew a

nd

ap

pro

val

of

SASD

p

rior

to

ap

pro

val

of

imp

rove

men

t p

lans

.

The

stud

y sh

all

dem

onst

rate

the

qua

ntity

of d

ischa

rge

and

any

“flo

w th

roug

h se

wa

ge”

alo

ng w

ith

ap

pro

pria

te p

ipe

sizes

and

rel

ate

d a

pp

urte

nanc

es f

rom

thi

s su

bje

ct a

nd o

ther

up

stre

am

a

rea

s a

nd

sha

ll b

e d

one

in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith

SASD

’s

mos

t re

cent

“M

inim

um S

ewer

Stu

dy

Req

uire

men

ts.”

The

stud

y sh

all

be

don

e on

a n

o “s

hed

-shi

ft”

ba

sis u

nles

s a

pp

rove

d b

y SA

SD i

n a

dva

nce

and

in

com

plia

nce

with

the

SA

SD

Des

ign

Sta

nda

rds.

Dep

end

ent u

pon

the

outc

ome

of th

e se

wer

stu

dy,

off-

site

sew

er

lines

ma

y b

e re

qui

red

at t

he d

iscre

tion

and

ap

pro

val o

f SA

SD.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

SASD

30.

A

ll a

ba

ndon

ed w

ells

on th

e p

rop

osed

Pro

ject

site

sha

ll b

e d

estro

yed

in a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

req

uire

men

ts o

f th

e Sa

cra

men

to C

ount

y En

viro

nmen

tal

Hea

lth D

ivisi

on.

Cle

arly

sho

w a

ll a

ban

don

ed/d

estro

yed

wel

ls on

the

im

pro

vem

ent

pla

ns f

or t

he

Proj

ect.

Prio

r to

ab

and

onin

g a

ny e

xist

ing

agr

icul

tura

l wel

ls, A

pp

lica

nt sh

all

use

wa

ter

from

agr

icul

tura

l wel

ls fo

r gra

din

g a

nd c

onst

ruct

ion.

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

SCW

A

31.

Pr

ovid

e m

eter

ed c

onne

ctio

ns o

n tra

nsm

issio

n m

ain

s to

the

sat

isfa

ctio

n of

the

Sa

cra

men

to C

ount

y W

ate

r Age

ncy.

Im

pro

vem

ent P

lans

SC

WA

32.

A

ll Tr

ans

miss

ion

ma

ins

sha

ll b

e lo

cate

d

with

in

a

pub

lic

right

-of-w

ay

or

with

in

ease

men

ts d

edic

ate

d t

o SC

WA

. Ea

sem

ents

sha

ll b

e re

view

ed a

nd a

ppr

oved

by

Sacr

am

ento

Cou

nty

Wa

ter

Age

ncy

prio

r to

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an

ap

pro

val

or F

ina

l M

ap

ap

pro

val

Imp

rove

men

t Pla

ns

SCW

A

Prio

r To

or In

Con

junc

tion

With

Fin

al M

ap R

ecor

datio

n

33.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll d

esig

n a

nd

cons

truct

a

w

estb

ound

rig

ht-tu

rn

poc

ket

for

Silv

era

do

Driv

e on

Bon

d R

oad

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

. Th

e tu

rn la

ne s

hall

incl

ude

a m

inim

um 1

00’ p

ocke

t with

a 9

0’ b

ay

tap

er.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

34.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te,

des

ign

and

im

pro

ve a

n ex

pa

nded

int

erse

ctio

n at

Si

lver

ad

o D

rive

and

Bo

nd

Roa

d

in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith

the

City

of

El

k G

rove

Im

pro

vem

ent

Stan

da

rds

and

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

The

sout

hbou

nd

ap

pro

ach

sha

ll a

ccom

mod

ate

a r

ight

-turn

la

ne a

nd a

sha

red

thr

oug

h/le

ft-tu

rn

lane

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

52

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

35.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll d

esig

n a

nd

cons

truct

a

no

rthb

ound

le

ft-tu

rn

poc

ket

for

Silv

era

do

Driv

e on

Wa

term

an

Roa

d to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

The

left-

turn

la

ne s

hall

incl

ude

a m

inim

um 1

20’

poc

ket

with

a 1

20’

ba

y ta

per

. A

pp

rop

riate

tra

nsiti

ons,

incl

udin

g a

ll ne

cess

ary

sig

nage

and

stri

pin

g no

rth a

nd s

outh

of S

ilver

ad

o D

rive.

The

tra

nsiti

on s

hall

be

in a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

lat

est

vers

ion

of C

alif

orni

a M

UTC

D a

nd to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

36.

A

ll m

edia

n isl

and

s sh

all

be

eith

er la

ndsc

ap

ed o

r dec

ora

tive

conc

rete

/ha

rdsc

ap

ed

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

. Fi

nal M

ap

Pub

lic W

orks

37.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

inst

all l

ad

der

cro

ssw

alk

stri

pin

g a

t th

e fo

llow

ing

loca

tions

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

o I

nter

sect

ion

of “

A”

Stre

et a

nd “

M”

Stre

et

o I

nter

sect

ion

of “

B” S

treet

and

“C

” C

t o

Int

erse

ctio

n of

“B”

Stre

et a

nd “

E” C

t o

Int

erse

ctio

n of

“V

” St

reet

and

Silv

era

do

Driv

e

Ad

diti

ona

l lo

catio

n(s)

ma

y b

e re

qui

red

and

will

be

det

erm

ined

at

Imp

rove

men

t Pl

an.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

53

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

38.

C

onsis

tent

with

the

SV

SPA

, th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

inst

all

enha

nced

ped

estri

an

cros

s-w

alk

s a

t th

e fo

llow

ing

inte

rsec

tions

whe

re t

rails

cro

ss r

oad

s or

oth

er e

nha

nced

p

edes

tria

n co

nnec

tions

are

pro

vid

ed.

“En

hanc

ed p

edes

tria

n cr

oss-

wa

lks”

sha

ll co

nsist

of c

olor

ed p

ave

rs (t

ype

and

col

or to

be

ap

pro

ved

by

the

Pla

nnin

g D

irect

or)

with

ped

estri

an c

ross

wa

lk st

ripin

g p

ursu

ant

to C

ity st

and

ard

s.”

o

M S

treet

and

Silv

era

do

Driv

e o

M S

treet

wes

t of L

ot W

(pa

seo)

o

A S

treet

nor

th o

f Lot

D (t

rail

corri

dor

) o

G S

treet

at I

stre

et, n

orth

sid

e o

I S

treet

at B

Stre

et, w

est s

ide

o S

ilver

ad

o D

rive

at B

Stre

et/V

illage

Cen

ter L

ane

, all

four

sid

es

o S

ilver

ad

o D

rive

at A

Stre

et, a

ll fo

ur si

des

o

Silv

era

do

Driv

e a

t U S

treet

/Lot

W (p

ase

o), n

orth

sid

e o

U S

treet

at O

Stre

et, n

orth

sid

e o

U S

treet

at R

Stre

et, n

orth

sid

e o

U S

treet

at V

Stre

et, n

orth

sid

e o

Lot

F tr

ail

at S

ilver

ad

o D

rive,

wes

t sid

e o

Silv

era

do

Driv

e a

t W

ater

ma

n Ro

ad

, no

rth s

ide

(con

nect

ing

to t

rail

head

at

Shel

don

and

Wa

term

an

pro

ject

)

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Pla

nnin

g

54

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

39.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

des

ign

and

con

stru

ct t

he f

ollo

win

g tra

ffic

calm

ing

dev

ices

in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith t

he C

ity’s

Im

pro

vem

ent

Sta

nda

rds

and

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of

Pub

lic W

orks

: •

Spee

d ta

ble

, hum

p, o

r lum

ps

o “

B” S

treet

, “G

” St

reet

, “M

” St

reet

, “O

” St

reet

, “V

” St

reet

, and

Silv

era

do

Driv

e

• Bu

lb-o

uts

o I

nter

sect

ion

of “

A”

Stre

et a

nd “

M”

Stre

et

o I

nter

sect

ion

of “

B” S

treet

and

“C

” C

t o

Int

erse

ctio

n of

“B”

Stre

et a

nd “

E” C

t o

Int

erse

ctio

n of

“V

” St

reet

and

Silv

era

do

Driv

e

o “

M”

Stre

et w

est o

f Lot

W (p

ase

o)

o “

A”

Stre

et n

orth

of L

ot D

(tra

il co

rrid

or)

Con

stru

ctio

n of

the

tra

ffic

calm

ing

dev

ices

sha

ll b

e co

mp

lete

d p

rior

to F

ina

l Map

a

ccep

tanc

e. A

dd

ition

al

loca

tion(

s) m

ay

be

req

uire

d a

nd w

ill b

e d

eter

min

ed a

t Im

pro

vem

ent P

lan.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

40.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pay

thei

r fa

ir-sh

are

cos

t tow

ard

s th

e d

esig

n a

nd c

onst

ruct

ion

of

the

Bond

Roa

d P

ipe

Upsiz

ing

pro

ject

as d

eter

min

ed b

y Pu

blic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

41.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te t

o th

e C

ity o

f El

k G

rove

, in

fee

title

, Lot

J,

det

entio

n a

rea

as s

how

n on

the

Tent

ativ

e Su

bd

ivisi

on M

ap

. Fi

nal M

ap

Pub

lic W

orks

42.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt sh

all

ded

ica

te to

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

, in

fee

title

, Lot

O a

nd L

ot N

for

land

sca

pin

g p

urp

oses

as s

how

n on

the

Tent

ativ

e Su

bd

ivisi

on M

ap

. Fi

nal M

ap

Pub

lic W

orks

43.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te a

ped

estri

an

ease

men

t ov

er a

ll p

ublic

sid

ewa

lks

that

a

re lo

cate

d o

utsid

e of

the

pub

lic ri

ght-

of-w

ay.

Fi

nal M

ap

Pub

lic W

orks

44.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te a

12.

5-fo

ot p

ublic

util

ity e

ase

men

t to

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve f

or u

nder

grou

nd f

aci

litie

s a

nd a

pp

urte

nanc

es a

dja

cent

to

all

pub

lic s

treet

s w

here

such

ea

sem

ents

do

not a

lrea

dy

exist

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

45.

T

he A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

sub

mit

lega

l des

crip

tions

and

pla

ts t

o th

e C

ity t

o se

t a

side

the

pro

pos

ed r

ight

-of-w

ay

for

“G”

Stre

et w

ithin

the

exi

stin

g C

ity p

rop

erty

alo

ng B

ond

Ro

ad

. T

he A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

be

resp

onsib

le f

or a

ll co

sts

incu

rred

to

pro

cess

the

se

doc

umen

ts th

roug

h C

ity C

ounc

il a

pp

rova

l.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

55

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

46.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te a

ll p

riva

te s

treet

s a

s a

n ea

sem

ent t

o al

low

acc

ess

for

serv

ices

such

as u

tility

and

em

erge

ncy

vehi

cles

. Fi

nal M

ap

Pub

lic W

orks

47.

A

ll el

igib

le p

ark

land

s, p

ark

land

, pa

seos

, tra

il co

rrid

ors,

and

oth

er o

pen

sp

ace

are

as

sha

ll b

e d

edic

ated

in fe

e tit

le to

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

and

/or C

osum

nes C

omm

unity

Se

rvic

es D

istric

t (C

CSD

). Pa

rk im

pro

vem

ents

sha

ll b

e b

ond

ed fo

r prio

r to

ap

pro

val o

f fin

al m

ap

or a

s ot

herw

ise s

pec

ified

in a

Dev

elop

men

t Agr

eem

ent a

pp

rove

d b

y th

e C

ity C

ounc

il.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

CC

SD

48.

Pr

ior t

o a

ny F

ina

l Ma

p a

ppro

val,

the

Ap

plic

ant

can

sa

tisfy

thei

r pub

lic im

pro

vem

ent

oblig

atio

ns b

y en

terin

g in

to a

Sub

div

ision

Im

pro

vem

ent

Agr

eem

ent

with

the

City

a

nd b

y p

rovi

din

g a

deq

uate

fina

ncia

l sec

urity

(e.g

. bon

ds,

lett

er o

f cre

dit,

etc

.).

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

49.

A

ll p

arc

els

to b

e d

edic

ate

d in

fee

to th

e C

ity, a

s a

con

diti

on o

f thi

s te

ntat

ive

ma

p,

sha

ll no

t b

e en

cum

ber

ed w

ith a

ny e

ase

men

ts n

or s

hall

it b

e su

bje

ct t

o a

dee

d o

f tru

st a

t th

e tim

e of

the

ded

ica

tion

on t

he f

ina

l ma

p.

A p

arti

al r

e-co

nvey

anc

e fo

r a

ny d

eed

of

trust

sha

ll b

e su

bm

itted

alo

ng w

ith t

he f

ina

l m

ap

for

City

Cou

ncil

Ap

pro

val.

The

Ap

plic

ant

sha

ll a

lso p

rovi

de

title

insu

ranc

e in

con

junc

tion

with

all

fee

title

ded

icat

ions

to th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve.

Fina

l Ma

p

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

50.

Th

e gr

ant

ing

of a

ny e

ase

men

t to

any

oth

er p

erso

n(s)

or e

ntity

, onc

e th

e te

ntat

ive

ma

p

has

bee

n a

pp

rove

d

is p

rohi

bite

d.

Shou

ld

such

gr

ant

b

e in

adve

rtent

ly

pro

vid

ed it

sha

ll b

e su

bor

din

ate

d t

o a

ny d

edic

atio

n of

stre

ets

or e

ase

men

ts t

o th

e C

ity o

f El

k G

rove

as

show

n on

the

fin

al m

ap

. A

sub

ord

ina

tion

doc

umen

t sh

all

be

sub

mitt

ed a

long

with

the

fina

l ma

p fo

r City

Cou

ncil

ap

pro

val.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

51.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

aba

ndon

a p

ortio

n of

rig

ht-o

f-wa

y ea

sem

ents

pur

sua

nt t

o 94

0224

O.R

. 203

2 a

s sh

own

on t

he T

enta

tive

Sub

div

ision

Ma

p t

o th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pu

blic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

52.

Pr

ior

to r

ecor

da

tion

of t

he F

ina

l Map

, the

Ap

plic

ant

sha

ll d

esig

n a

nd im

pro

ve t

he

mul

ti-p

urp

ose

trail

segm

ents

, (in

clud

ing

but

not

lim

ited

to,

Lot

s D

, H, A

A, B

B, C

C)

as

iden

tifie

d on

the

ten

tativ

e su

bd

ivisi

on m

ap

, in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith a

dop

ted

tra

il st

and

ard

s a

nd a

s sh

own

on t

he t

enta

tive

sub

div

ision

ma

p a

nd t

he S

VSP

A.

The

Ap

plic

ant

sha

ll b

e re

spon

sible

for

ma

inta

inin

g th

e tra

il se

gmen

t un

til it

ha

s b

een

acc

epte

d fo

r ma

inte

nanc

e b

y th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve a

nd/o

r CC

SD o

r unt

il 1

yea

r ha

s el

ap

sed

afte

r the

imp

rove

men

ts a

re a

ccep

ted

as c

omp

lete

, whi

chev

er o

ccur

s firs

t.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

56

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

53.

Pr

ior t

o re

cord

atio

n of

the

Fina

l Ma

p, t

he A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

des

ign

and

imp

rove

op

en

spa

ce L

ot F

and

Lot

I a

s id

entif

ied

on

the

tent

ativ

e su

bd

ivisi

on m

ap

. Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll b

e re

spon

sible

for m

ain

tain

ing

the

open

sp

ace

unt

il it

has

bee

n a

ccep

ted

for

ma

inte

nanc

e b

y th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve a

nd/o

r CC

SD o

r unt

il 1

yea

r ha

s ela

pse

d a

fter

the

imp

rove

men

ts a

re a

ccep

ted

as c

omp

lete

, whi

chev

er o

ccur

s firs

t.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

54.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

ded

ica

te,

des

ign

and

im

pro

ve a

n ex

pa

nded

int

erse

ctio

n at

Si

lver

ad

o D

rive

and

Wa

term

an

Roa

d i

n a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve

Imp

rove

men

t Sta

nda

rds a

nd to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p

Pub

lic W

orks

55.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll d

edic

ate

rig

ht-o

f-wa

y fo

r a

fu

ture

ro

und

ab

out

at

the

inte

rsec

tion

of S

ilver

ad

o D

rive

and

Wa

term

an

Roa

d t

o th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

56.

Fo

r all

singl

e fa

mily

cor

ner l

ots,

an

acc

ess

rest

rictio

n sh

all

be

pla

ced

on

the

pro

per

ty

from

the

driv

ewa

y a

roun

d th

e co

rner

to th

e p

rop

erty

line

of t

he si

de

yard

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

57.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt

sha

ll d

esig

n th

is Pr

ojec

t to

a

deq

uate

ly

acc

omm

oda

te

the

pla

cem

ent o

f tra

sh a

nd re

cycl

e co

nta

iner

s on

all

stre

ets

with

out b

lock

ing

com

mon

lo

t driv

ewa

ys o

r priv

ate

driv

ewa

ys.

This

ma

y re

qui

re a

dd

ition

al s

treet

fron

tage

, and

th

e in

stal

latio

n of

“N

o Pa

rkin

g” s

igns

pro

hib

iting

pa

rkin

g on

sol

id w

ast

e se

rvic

e d

ays

. A

n a

ltern

ativ

e so

lutio

n m

ay

be

ap

pro

ved

by

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve’s

Int

egra

ted

Wa

ste

Prog

ram

Ma

nage

r. A

ll tra

sh,

recy

clin

g a

nd g

reen

wa

ste

carts

are

to

be

stor

ed o

nsite

, out

of v

iew

of t

he g

ener

al p

ublic

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

58.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

mod

ify t

he e

xist

ing

traffi

c sig

nal

at t

he i

nter

sect

ion

of B

ond

Ro

ad

/Cro

wel

l Driv

e/Si

lver

ad

o D

rive

to a

ccom

mod

ate

the

four

th le

g in

acc

ord

anc

e w

ith C

ity o

f El

k G

rove

Im

pro

vem

ent

Sta

nda

rds

and

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

W

orks

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

59.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

des

ign

and

im

pro

ve t

he w

este

rly h

alf-

sect

ion

of W

ate

rman

Ro

ad

, so

uth

of

Silv

era

do

Driv

e, m

easu

red

36’

fro

m t

he a

pp

rove

d c

ente

rline

. Im

pro

vem

ents

will

be

bas

ed o

n 72

’ arte

rial i

n a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

Im

pro

vem

ent S

tand

ard

s and

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

60.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt sh

all

pa

y a

ll d

rain

age

fees

for p

ark

s and

tra

ils lo

ts.

Doc

umen

tatio

n to

th

e C

CSD

ver

ifyin

g p

aym

ent o

f dra

ina

ge fe

es sh

all

be

req

uire

d.

Fina

l Ma

p C

CSD

Pa

rks

57

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

61.

Pr

ovid

e th

e C

SD w

ith v

erifi

catio

n th

at t

he L

OT

G a

nd L

OT

K p

ark

site

s a

re f

ree

of

wet

land

s.

Alte

rna

tivel

y,

pro

vid

e d

ocum

enta

tion

verif

ying

a

ll w

etla

nd

fill

req

uire

men

ts h

ave

bee

n a

dd

ress

ed.

Fina

l Ma

l C

CSD

Pa

rks

62.

Pr

ior t

o th

e re

cord

atio

n of

the

fina

l ma

p, t

he A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

eith

er (

1) a

pp

rove

an

ann

ual

Com

mun

ity F

aci

litie

s D

istric

t (“

CFD

”) s

pec

ial

tax

or (

2) d

epos

it a

sum

of

mon

ey,

as

det

erm

ined

by

the

CC

SD,

suffi

cien

t fo

r th

e C

CSD

to

fund

the

cos

t of

b

oth

(a)

rout

ine

and

def

erre

d m

ain

tena

nce

and

rep

lace

men

t of

pa

rk f

aci

litie

s, tra

ils,

and

cor

ridor

s a

ttrib

uta

ble

to

the

pro

per

ty;

and

(b

) re

pla

cem

ent

of d

istric

t-w

ide

faci

litie

s a

ttrib

utab

le t

o th

e p

rop

erty

. In

the

eve

nt t

hat

the

Ap

plic

ant

fa

ils t

o a

pp

rove

an

ann

ual

CFD

sp

ecia

l ta

x or

dep

osit

a s

uffic

ient

sum

of

mon

ey a

s p

rovi

ded

her

e fo

r suc

h p

urp

ose

for t

he C

CSD

, no

Fina

l Ma

p sh

all b

e re

cord

ed.

Fina

l Ma

p C

CSD

Pa

rks

63.

Pr

ior

to t

he r

ecor

da

tion

of t

he F

ina

l M

ap

, th

e A

pp

lica

nt(s

) sh

all

(1)

ap

pro

ve a

n a

nnua

l Mel

lo-R

oos

Com

mun

ity F

aci

litie

s D

istric

t sp

ecia

l ta

x or

(2)

dep

osit

a s

um o

f m

oney

, as

det

erm

ined

by

the

Cos

umne

s C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s D

istric

t, su

ffici

ent

for

the

Cos

umne

s C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s D

istric

t to

fun

d a

por

tion

of t

he c

ost

of t

he

Dist

rict's

ong

oing

fire

and

em

erge

ncy

serv

ices

, ma

inte

nanc

e, o

per

atio

n, a

nd re

pa

ir a

nd r

epla

cem

ent

of f

ire s

tatio

n fa

cilit

ies

and

fire

and

em

erge

ncy

equi

pm

ent.

Any

co

sts

for t

he a

pp

rova

l and

cre

atio

n of

suc

h a

nnua

l sp

ecia

l ta

x, a

nnex

atio

n of

the

Pr

oper

ty in

to a

n ex

istin

g M

ello

-Roo

s C

omm

unity

Fa

cilit

ies

Dist

rict

for

the

Cos

umne

s C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s D

istric

t, or

ad

min

istra

tion

of t

he s

um o

f m

oney

dep

osite

d t

o fu

nd t

he f

ire a

nd e

mer

genc

y se

rvic

es,

sha

ll b

e p

aid

fro

m t

he a

nnua

l Pr

ior

to

bui

ldin

g sp

ecia

l ta

xes

of t

he C

omm

unity

Fa

cilit

ies

Dist

rict

or t

he s

um o

f m

oney

Pe

rmit

issua

nce

dep

osite

d w

ith t

he C

osum

nes

Com

mun

ity S

ervi

ces

Dist

rict.

In t

he

even

t tha

t the

Ap

plic

ant

fails

to a

pp

rove

an

ann

ual s

pec

ial t

ax

or d

epos

it a

sum

of

mon

ey a

s p

rovi

ded

for

her

ein

for

such

pur

pos

es f

or t

he C

osum

nes

Com

mun

ity

Serv

ices

Dist

rict n

o Fi

nal M

ap

sha

ll b

e re

cord

ed.

Fina

l Ma

p C

CSD

Fire

58

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

64.

Pr

ior

to f

ina

l ma

p,

the

Proj

ect

are

a s

hall

ann

ex in

to t

he M

ain

tena

nce

Mel

lo-R

oos

Com

mun

ity

Faci

litie

s D

istric

t 20

06-1

(C

FD),

to

fund

th

e Pr

ojec

t’s

fair

sha

re

of

land

sca

pe

rela

ted

ma

inte

nanc

e co

sts

ass

ocia

ted

with

pub

lic p

ark

way

s, p

ublic

p

ark

s, op

en

spa

ce,

land

sca

pe

setb

ack

s, b

ike

and

ot

her

pat

hs,

land

sca

ped

m

edia

ns

in

and

a

dja

cent

to

ro

ad

wa

ys,

ma

inte

nanc

e a

nd

oper

atio

n of

a

co

mm

unity

cen

ter,

spor

ts (

incl

udin

g a

qua

tic)

faci

litie

s, cu

ltura

l a

rts c

ente

r, a

nd

wat

er fe

atu

res,

and

ma

inte

nanc

e of

oth

er re

late

d fa

cilit

ies.

The

ann

exa

tion

pro

cess

ca

n ta

ke s

ever

al m

onth

s, so

Ap

plic

ant

(s)

shou

ld p

lan

acc

ord

ingl

y. T

he a

pp

licat

ion

fee

for

the

ann

exat

ion

is d

ue p

rior

to t

he R

esol

utio

n of

Int

entio

n to

Ann

ex t

he

Prop

erty

and

Lev

y th

e Sp

ecia

l Ta

x. F

or f

urth

er in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

this

CFD

, se

e ht

tp:/

/ww

w.e

lkgr

ovec

ity.o

rg/f

ina

nce/

cfd

-info

rma

tion.

asp

.

Fina

l Ma

p Fi

nanc

e

65.

Pr

ior

to f

ina

l ma

p, t

he P

roje

ct a

rea

sha

ll a

nnex

into

the

Pol

ice

Serv

ices

Mel

lo-R

oos

Com

mun

ity F

aci

litie

s D

istric

t 20

03-2

(C

FD),

to f

und

the

Pro

ject

’s f

air

sha

re o

f Pu

blic

Sa

fety

cos

ts. T

he a

nnex

atio

n p

roce

ss c

an

take

sev

era

l mon

ths,

so a

pp

lican

ts s

houl

d

pla

n a

ccor

din

gly.

The

ap

plic

atio

n fe

e fo

r th

e a

nnex

atio

n is

due

prio

r to

the

Re

solu

tion

of In

tent

ion

to A

nnex

the

Pro

per

ty a

nd L

evy

the

Spec

ial T

ax.

For

fur

ther

in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

this

CFD

, se

e ht

tp:/

/ww

w.e

lkgr

ovec

ity.o

rg/f

ina

nce/

cfd

-in

form

atio

n.a

sp.

Fina

l Ma

p Fi

nanc

e

66.

Pr

ior

to t

he f

ina

l ma

p,

the

Proj

ect

are

a s

hall

ann

ex in

to t

he S

treet

Ma

inte

nanc

e A

sses

smen

t D

istric

t N

o. 1

Zon

e 3

to f

und

a p

ortio

n of

the

ad

diti

ona

l cos

ts f

or lo

ng-

term

ro

ad

wa

y m

ain

tena

nce

rela

ted

to

se

rvin

g th

e ne

w

dev

elop

men

t. Th

e a

nnex

atio

n p

roce

ss

can

take

se

vera

l m

onth

s, so

A

pp

lica

nts

shou

ld

pla

n a

ccor

din

gly.

The

ap

plic

atio

n fe

e fo

r the

ann

exat

ion

is d

ue p

rior t

o th

e Re

solu

tion

of

Inte

ntio

n to

Lev

y St

reet

Ma

inte

nanc

e A

sses

smen

ts.

For

furth

er i

nfor

ma

tion

on t

his

Dist

rict,

see

http

://w

ww

.elk

grov

ecity

.org

/fin

anc

e/a

sses

smen

t-ot

her-d

ist-in

fo.a

sp.

Fina

l Ma

p Fi

nanc

e

67.

Pr

ior

to t

he f

ina

l map

, the

Pro

ject

are

a s

hall

ann

ex in

to t

he S

torm

Wa

ter D

rain

age

Fe

e Zo

ne 2

to

fund

a p

ortio

n of

the

ad

diti

ona

l cos

ts fo

r sto

rm w

ate

r dra

ina

ge a

nd

run-

off

ma

inte

nanc

e re

late

d t

o se

rvin

g th

e ne

w d

evel

opm

ent.

The

ann

exa

tion

pro

cess

ca

n ta

ke s

ever

al

mon

ths,

so a

pp

lica

nts

shou

ld p

lan

acc

ord

ingl

y.

The

ap

plic

atio

n fe

e fo

r the

ann

exa

tion

is d

ue p

rior t

o th

e Re

solu

tion

of In

tent

ion

to L

evy

Stor

m W

ate

r D

rain

age

Fee

Zon

e 2

ass

essm

ents

. F

or f

urth

er i

nfor

ma

tion

on t

his

Dist

rict,

see

http

://w

ww

.elk

grov

ecity

.org

/fin

anc

e/a

sses

smen

t-ot

her-d

ist-in

fo.a

sp.

Fina

l Ma

p Fi

nanc

e

68.

A

ll st

reet

na

mes

sha

ll b

e a

pp

rove

d b

y th

e C

ity o

f Elk

Gro

ve, i

n co

nsul

tatio

n w

ith th

e C

osum

nes C

SD F

ire D

epa

rtmen

t, a

s pa

rt of

the

reco

rda

tion

of th

e Fi

nal M

ap.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

CC

SD F

ire

Dep

artm

ent

59

http://www.elkgrovecity.org/finance/cfd-information.asp



http://www.elkgrovecity.org/finance/assessment-other-dist-info.asp

http://www.elkgrovecity.org/finance/assessment-other-dist-info.asp

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

69.

A

stre

et n

am

e, f

rom

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve V

eter

ans

Stre

et N

am

e Pr

ogra

m, s

hall

be

ass

igne

d t

o th

e Pr

ojec

t fo

r use

on

a s

treet

with

in t

he s

ubd

ivisi

on in

acc

ord

anc

e to

C

ity P

olic

y a

nd to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

Fina

l Ma

p Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Prio

r To

or In

Con

junc

tion

With

Bui

ldin

g Pe

rmit

70.

A

ll b

uild

ing,

ap

artm

ent,

and

sui

te n

umb

ers

ad

dre

ssin

g sh

all

be

ap

pro

ved

by

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve B

uild

ing

Dep

artm

ent

in c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ith t

he C

osum

nes

CSD

Fire

D

epa

rtmen

t.

Prio

r to

Issua

nce

of

1st B

uild

ing

Perm

it Bu

ildin

g D

epa

rtmen

t C

CSD

Fire

D

epa

rtmen

t

71.

A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

und

erta

ke a

goo

d f

aith

effo

rt to

am

end

the

Pre

serv

e O

per

atio

ns

and

Ma

nage

men

t Pla

n to

ad

dre

ss th

e fo

llow

ing:

•

Allo

w

the

use

of

all

ava

ilab

le

mos

qui

to

cont

rol

pro

duc

ts,

incl

udin

g a

dul

ticid

es, t

o b

e us

ed w

ithin

the

entir

e p

roje

ct a

rea

to a

deq

uate

ly p

rote

ct

the

nea

rby

resid

ents

fro

m

vect

or

bor

ne

dise

ase

s, a

s p

rovi

ded

in

th

e Sa

cra

men

to-Y

olo

Mos

qui

to

and

V

ecto

r C

ontro

l’s

Inte

grat

ed

Pest

M

ana

gem

ent P

lan

(IPM

) •

Incl

ude

rout

ine

ma

inte

nanc

e a

ctiv

ities

to

re

duc

e m

osq

uito

b

reed

ing

sour

ces a

nd su

bse

que

nt c

hem

ica

l ap

plic

atio

ns.

Prio

r to

Issua

nce

of

1st B

uild

ing

Perm

it M

osq

uito

and

V

ecto

r Con

trol

72.

A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

pro

vid

e th

e Sa

cra

men

to-Y

olo

Mos

qui

to a

nd V

ecto

r C

ontro

l Dist

rict

with

a c

opy

of th

e fo

llow

ing:

•

An

upd

ate

d c

opy

of t

he C

once

ptu

al S

torm

Dra

ina

ge P

lan

and

Sto

rm D

rain

M

ast

er P

lan

as m

entio

ned

in th

e a

pp

rove

d 4

04 p

erm

it.

• C

onst

ruct

ion

det

ails

, lon

g te

rm m

ain

tena

nce

ma

nda

tes,

and

sch

edul

es f

or

the

det

entio

n b

asin

, st

orm

filt

er d

evic

es l

oca

ted

nea

r Bo

nd R

oad

, a

nd

curb

side

catc

h b

asin

s.

Prio

r to

Issua

nce

of

1st B

uild

ing

Perm

it M

osq

uito

and

V

ecto

r Con

trol

73.

Fi

nal M

ap

(s)

sha

ll b

e co

mp

lete

d, a

pp

rove

d, a

nd re

cord

ed p

rior t

o iss

uanc

e of

the

1s

t Bui

ldin

g Pe

rmit.

Mod

el h

ome

per

mits

ma

y b

e iss

ued

prio

r to

the

reco

rdin

g of

the

Fina

l Ma

p u

pon

ap

pro

val o

f the

City

.

Build

ing

Perm

it

Pub

lic W

orks

Pl

ann

ing

74.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

sub

mit

a F

lood

Ele

vatio

n C

ertif

icat

ion

for

Lots

/Pa

rcel

s th

at

are

loca

ted

with

in t

he 1

00-y

ear

flood

pla

in li

mit.

A

ltern

ativ

e d

ocum

enta

tion

of f

lood

a

nd l

ot e

leva

tions

ma

y b

e su

bm

itted

if

det

erm

ined

to

be

ad

equa

te b

y Pu

blic

W

orks

.

Build

ing

Perm

it Pu

blic

Wor

ks

60

of 2

9

Con

ditio

ns o

f App

rova

l Tim

ing

/ Im

plem

enta

tion

Enfo

rcem

ent /

M

onito

ring

Verif

icat

ion

(dat

e an

d sig

natu

re)

75.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

rep

lace

all

hand

ica

p r

am

ps

ad

jace

nt t

o th

e Pr

ojec

t sit

e a

nd

othe

r con

diti

oned

imp

rove

men

t her

ein

that

do

not m

eet c

urre

nt A

DA

Sta

nda

rds

to

the

satis

fact

ion

of P

ublic

Wor

ks.

Build

ing

Perm

it Pu

blic

Wor

ks

76.

Th

e A

pp

lica

nt s

hall

reco

nstru

ct a

ny d

eter

iora

ted

cur

b,

gut

ter,

sidew

alk

and

/or

pa

vem

ent,

and

AD

A c

omp

lianc

e im

pro

vem

ents

alo

ng t

he p

roje

ct’s

fro

nta

ge t

o th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

. If p

ave

men

t rep

lace

men

t is r

equi

red

, the

Ap

plic

ant

m

ay

be

req

uire

d t

o gr

ind

, ove

rlay,

and

/or

slurry

sea

l pur

sua

nt t

o C

ity o

f El

k G

rove

Im

pro

vem

ent S

tand

ard

s and

to th

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n of

Pub

lic W

orks

.

Build

ing

Perm

it Pu

blic

Wor

ks

77.

A

t a

ll st

reet

inte

rsec

tions

ad

jace

nt t

o th

e Pr

ojec

t, p

ublic

or

priv

ate

, the

Ap

plic

ant

sh

all

inst

all

and

/or

rep

lace

stre

et n

am

e sig

ns i

n a

ccor

da

nce

with

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve S

tand

ard

Det

ails

.

Build

ing

Perm

it Pu

blic

Wor

ks

#

#

61

of 29

Exhibit D Project Plans Dated October 18, 2012

62

skyles

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT D

skyles

Typewritten Text

of 29

63

of 29

64

of 29

65

DRAFT

Vintara Holdings Dev. Agr. - 1 -

Development Agreement By and between the City of Elk Grove and Vintara Holdings LLC (Silverado Homes)

Relative to the Development Known as Silverado Village (EG-11-046)

This Development Agreement (hereinafter “Agreement”) is made and entered into this day of , 20 , by and between the City of Elk Grove (hereinafter “City”) and Vintara Holdings LLC (hereinafter “Developer”) (collectively “Parties”), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65896.5 of the California Government Code and Sections 23.16.140 et seq. of the City's Municipal Code, establishing rules, regulations and procedures for the consideration of development agreements.

RECITALS

A. Enabling Statute. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risks of development, the legislature of the State of California adopted Sections 65865 et seq. of the California Government Code enabling a City and an applicant for a development project, who has a legal or an equitable interest in the property to be developed, to enter into a development agreement establishing with certainty what zoning standards and land use regulations of the City will govern the construction and implementation of the development project from beginning to completion. B. Development Agreement Goals. City and Developer desire to enter into this Agreement relating to the Property in order to facilitate the goal of the City to implement the City’s General Plan, to provide housing opportunities to the broadest spectrum of the community and to facilitate the build-out of the Development Plan as entitled. The City and Developer, by entering into this Agreement, will receive the benefit of gaining assurance that the Property will be not be developed unless the Property is developed as set out in the Development Plan . C. Project Description. The Project is a 230± acre residential community located north of Bond Road and west of Waterman Road in the City of Elk Grove. The Project would develop 660 single family units and up to 125 independent/assisted living/memory care units. The Project also includes two public parks, open space and trails, a detention area/basin, and dedications for public rights-of-way internal to the project and along Bond and Waterman Roads.

D. Property Zoning. The Property subject to this Agreement is zoned Silverado Village Special Planning Area. The Silverado Village Special Plan Area includes, as described above, two villages that provide for single family residential use, totaling 393 dwellings units; an age-restricted village of 267 patio homes and “village core” lodge facility with a maximum of 125 independent living, assisted living, and/or memory care units; 71 acres of open space; a 15.7 acre detention basin; and 6.1 acres of parkland.

66

skyles

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT E

skyles

Typewritten Text

skyles

Typewritten Text

DRAFT


E. General Plan Consistency. The City Council hereby finds this Agreement consistent with the City's General Plan based upon the following finding:

The City’s General Plan identifies the Project site for residential uses, including 146±

acres of Low Density Residential land, 80± acres of Rural Residential land, and 4± acres of Commercial/Office/Multifamily land. Together, these lands allow for 1,182 dwelling units. The proposed Project includes 660 dwellings units and 125 independent/assisted living/memory care units, which is less than the total allowed under the General Plan.

The General Plan identifies 3.7± acres of the Project site for Commercial uses. The

proposed project incorporates commercial uses through the “village core” lodge facility. The procedures and practices of the Special Planning Area zoning allow for the rearrangement of these uses within the planning area. The scale of the “village core” lodge facility is less than that contemplated in the General Plan, as it is only 2.5± acres.

Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use plan.

F. Vested Rights. In order to strengthen the public planning process and reduce the economic risks of development, by this Agreement the City intends to assist Developer in moving its Project forward in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement requires investment by Developer in public facilities, front-end investment in onsite and offsite improvements, dedications of land for public benefit and purposes, and commitment of the resources of Developer to achieve the public benefits of the project for the community. City recognizes and has determined that the granting of the rights herein and developing the project as set forth in the Development Plan will assist Developer in undertaking the development of the Project and thereby achieve the public benefits of the Project. But for said commitments on the part of City and Developer, the parties would not enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in further consideration of the above recitals, all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement, and the mutual promises and covenants of the parties contained in this Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1. Property Description and Binding Covenants. The Property is that unimproved real property owned or otherwise controlled by Developer described in Exhibit “A”. It is intended and determined that the provisions of this Agreement, to the extent permitted by law, shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and to their successors in interest.

67

DRAFT


1.2. Development Plan. For purposes of this Agreement, the term “Development Plan” shall refer to the approved zoning for the property (The Silverado Village Special Planning Area, Ordinance _________), the approved Tentative Subdivision Map (Resolution _________), and this Agreement. Subsequently approved use permits or other entitlements or approvals (e.g., single family master home plan design review) made in furtherance of the Project shall be deemed thereafter to be an element of the Development Plan. City personnel may make such modifications to the Development Plan in the ordinary course of implementation of development so long as it does not substantially alter the permitted uses, density, or intensity of use, provisions for reservation and dedication of land or conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements relating to the approved Development Plan only for the Project described in this Development Agreement. The City may amend the Silverado Village Special Planning Area and zoning for any other project not described in this Development Agreement. 1.3. Interest of Developer. Developer represents that Developer has a fee or controlling interest in the Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be bound by this Agreement. The holders of any legal or equitable title of record other than Developer shall sign this Agreement giving their consent to the recordation of the Agreement. 1.4 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the effective date of the ordinance authorizing the approval and execution of this Agreement and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years from that date unless it is terminated, modified or extended by the circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by the mutual agreement of the parties. 1.5. Assignment. Developer shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer the Property in whole or in part, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement, provided that any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer shall include the assignment of those rights, duties, and obligations arising under or from this Agreement applicable to the Property or portions thereof being assigned, transferred or sold. 1.6. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the principal offices of the City and Developer or Developer’s assigns and successors. Notice shall be effective on the date delivered in person, or the date when the postal authorities indicate that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving party indicated below: Notice to the City: City of Elk Grove Attn: Planning Director

8401 Laguna Palms Way Elk Grove, CA 95758

68

DRAFT


Notice to the Developer: Vintarra Land Holdings, LLC c/o Silverado Homes, Inc. attn: Paul H. Eblen 140 Diamond Creek Place Roseville, CA. 95747

SECTION 2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY

2.1. Land Use Entitlements. The permitted land uses, density and intensity of use of the Property, timing or phasing of development, zoning, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the location and size of major transportation, sewer, drainage and water facilities and improvements shall be those set forth in the Development Plan at the time of the effective date of this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and any other resolution, rule, regulation or policy of the City now in existence, the provision of this Agreement shall control. 2.2. Applicable Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. The ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations, official policies and General Plan of the City governing permitted uses, timing and rate of development, density, design, improvements and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property, shall be those rules, regulations and official policies in force at the time of the execution of this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and Applicable Law, or the terms of this Agreement and any Current Approval, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. 2.2.1 Exceptions. Notwithstanding section 2.2, the following provisions shall apply:

a. Uniform Codes. City may apply the then-current California Building Standards Code referred to in California Health and Safety Code section 18935 and other uniform construction codes to the Property at the time a building permit is approved, provided that any such uniform code shall apply to the Property only to the extent that the code has been adopted by City.

b. Processing Fees. Fees charged by City which solely represent the

reasonable costs to City for City staff time (including staff, agents, and authorized consultants) and resources spent reviewing and processing subsequent approvals (e.g., final map(s), improvement plans, building permit), are referred to in this Agreement as “Processing Fees.” City may charge Owner the applicable Processing Fees that are operative and in force and effect in the City on a City-wide basis at the time such fees are customarily required by the City to be paid.

c. Impact Fees. City may charge Owner the applicable Impact Fees

that are operative and in force and effect in the City on a City-wide basis at the time such fees are customarily required by the City to be paid.

69

DRAFT


2.2.1. Application of Subsequently Enacted or Modified Rules, Regulations and Ordinances. Subsequently enacted rules, regulations, ordinances, laws, and official policies adopted or modified after the date of this Agreement shall apply provided: a. They are applied uniformly to all similar properties or developments in the City; b. They do not prevent development of the Property for the uses, the density or intensity of development or the rate or timing of development set forth in the Development Plan; and c. They are not in conflict with matters which are specifically addressed in the Development Plan. 2.3. City Fees, Taxes and Assessments. Developer shall pay those City fees, taxes and assessments in existence at the time of the approval of any entitlements on the Property provided that: a. Such fees, taxes and assessments apply to all private projects or works within the City and are reasonably related to the cost of the facility or service for which the fee or assessment is imposed; b. Their application to the Property is prospective as to applications for building and other development permits or approvals of tentative subdivision maps not yet accepted for processing; and c. Such fees, taxes and assessments are not exacted for which Developer has otherwise provided mitigation pursuant to the Development Plan. 2.3.1. Processing Fees and Charges. Developer shall pay those processing fees and charges of every kind and nature imposed or required by City under current or future regulations covering the actual costs of City in (i) processing applications and requests for permits, approvals and other actions, and (ii) monitoring compliance with any permits issued or approvals granted or the performance of any conditions with respect thereto or any performance required of Developer hereunder.

SECTION 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES

3.1. Property Development. The Property shall be developed according to the Development Plan as set forth in this Agreement. 3.2. Vested Rights. By entering into this Agreement, City hereby grants to Developer a vested right to proceed with the development of the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Development Plan and Applicable Rules. Developer’s vested right to proceed with the project shall be subject to any subsequent discretionary approvals required in order to complete the project, provided that any conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for such subsequent discretionary approvals shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development or rate or timing of development

70

DRAFT


set forth in this Agreement and the Development Plan, provided Developer is not in default under this Agreement.

SECTION 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

4.1. Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of Developer and represent that they have the authority to bind Developer to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 4.2. Consent. Where the consent or approval of a party is required in or necessary under this Agreement, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4.3. Construction of Agreement. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of construction. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 4.4. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with the exhibits, constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. 4.5. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be adjudicated to be invalid, void or illegal, it shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision hereto, unless such adjustment affects a material part of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, in the event that any material provision of this Agreement is found to be unenforceable, void or voidable, Developer or the City may terminate this Agreement upon providing written notice to the other party.

4.6. Attorneys’ Fees. In any arbitration, quasi-judicial, or administrative proceedings or any of such party’s rights or remedies under this Agreement, including any action for declaratory or equitable relief, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and all costs, expenses and disbursements in connection with such action, including the costs of reasonable investigation, preparation and professional or expert consultation, which sums may be included in any judgment or decree entered in such action in favor of the prevailing party. 4.7. Recording. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Agreement to be recorded with the Sacramento County Recorder no later than ten (10) days following execution of this Agreement by City, which execution will take place no sooner than the effective date of the ordinance approving this Agreement.

71

DRAFT


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly signed this Agreement as of the date first written above. DEVELOPER VINTARRA LAND HOLDINGS, LLC BY: SILVERADO REALTY, INC. It’s Manager By: Paul H. Eblen Vice-President CITY: By: ATTEST: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney

72

CEQA Findings – Silverado Village 1

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SILVERADO VILLAGE PROJECT

REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq)

I. INTRODUCTION The City of Elk Grove (City), as lead agency, has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Silverado Village Project (Project), State Clearinghouse No. 2013012060. The EIR consists of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR. The EIR is a project-level EIR pursuant to Section 15161 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and analyzes the significant effects on the environment of the Project.

CEQA requires the City as the lead agency to: 1) make written findings when it approves a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) was certified, and 2) identify overriding considerations for significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR.

These findings explain how the City, as the lead agency, approached the significant and potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR prepared for the Project. The statement of overriding considerations identifies economic, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project that override any significant environmental impacts that would result from the Project.

As required under CEQA, the Final EIR describes the Project, adverse environmental impacts of the project, and mitigation measures and alternatives that would substantially reduce or avoid those impacts. The information and conclusions contained in the EIR reflect the City’s independent judgment regarding the potential adverse environmental impacts of the Project.

The Final EIR (which includes the Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR, responses to comments, and revisions to the Draft EIR) for the Project, examined several alternatives to the Project that were not chosen as part of the approved project (the No Project Alternative, Reduced Density and Reconfigured Project Alternative, and Reconfigured Project Alternative).

The Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth below (“Findings”) are presented for adoption by the City Council, as the City’s findings under CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) relating to the Project. The Findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of this City Council regarding the Project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives to the Project, and the overriding considerations, which in this City Council’s view, justify approval of the Project, despite its environmental effects.

73

skyles

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 3

skyles

Typewritten Text

2 CEQA Findings – Silverado Village

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT LOCATION

The Project proposes a 230-acre residential community located north of Bond Road and west of Waterman Road within the incorporated boundary of the City (APNs 127-0010-104, 127-0010-105, 127-0010-017, 127-0010-002, 127-0010-040, and 127-0010-106).

OVERVIEW

The Project proposes 660 single family units, up to 125 independent/assisted living/memory care units, a community clubhouse, an 11.4-acre park and trail system, 93.7 acres of open space, including a 68.1-acre wetland preservation area and 14.7 acre detention basin, and supporting infrastructure. Figures 2-3 and 2-4 of the Draft EIR depict the key Project characteristics and Table 2-2 of the Draft EIR summarizes the proposed uses.

The Project site is designated by the General Plan Land Use Policy Map as Rural Residential, Low Density Residential, and Commercial/Office/Multi-Family. The Project site is zoned RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, RD- 5(F), and O.

The residential component of the Project would be developed in three villages. Villages 1 and 2 would include 393 single family residential uses. Village 3 would be a private senior community, with 267 single family patio homes, up to 125 units for independent, assisted, and/or memory-care in a multifamily lodge, and a Village clubhouse, atrium, and swimming pool. The lodge and clubhouse facilities would include retail, office, medical, and commercial uses to serve the senior community.

Primary access would be from Bond and Waterman Roads. There would also be a secondary point of access from Bond Road. The Project includes pedestrian and bicycle features to provide both internal connectivity as well as connections to adjacent bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Two emergency vehicle accesses would be provided.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

As set forth in Chapter 2.0 of the Draft EIR (p. 2.0-2), the City has identified the following objectives for Project:

• Create a high-quality residential development that is consistent with the General Plan;

• Provide a residential development that would assist the City in meeting its housing needs, including a range of housing types to serve the senior population;

• Emphasize preservation of open space and sensitive habitats;

• Implement the City’s Trail System Master Plan through providing an on-site trails network that is accessible by the general public and provides opportunities for connectivity with future trails on adjacent property; and

• Create a dual purpose stormwater/open space area.

74


As set forth in Chapter 2.0 of the Draft EIR (pp. 2.0-2 and 2.0-3), the Project applicant, Vintara Holdings LLC/Silverado Homes, has submitted the following Project Objectives for the Project:

• Consistency with the General Plan;

• Compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods;

• Respect the Project site’s existing natural features; and

• Creation of a unique age-restricted community that provides a mix of housing types and amenities, including the village core, club house, and swim facility.

DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS

The discretionary actions by the City, as lead agency, that are required to fully implement the Project are listed below.

• Certification of the EIR;

• Establishment of the Silverado Village Special Planning Area (Silverado Village SPA) which will establish development standards, design guidelines, and allowed uses for the Project site, as provided by Section 23.16.100 of the City’s Municipal Code;

• A rezone of the Project site from the existing zoning of RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, and Open Space to Silverado Village SPA;

• A Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the Project site to accommodate:

o 660 single-family residential lots on 115.1 acres;

o An age restricted-multi-family lodge of up to 125 units and Village Center on 4.6 acres;

o 77.3 acres of open space and nature preservation area;

o Up to 5.5 acres of parks;

o 3.5 acres of landscape entry/corridors;

o A stormwater detention area of 14.7 acres and overland release area of 0.6 acres; and

o 5.5 acres of roads;

• A Development Agreement requiring the Project to conform to the Silverado Village SPA; and.

• Design review.

Permits and approvals that the Applicant has obtained or may be required to obtain from responsible and federal agencies include, but are not limited to:

75


• California Department of Fish & Wildlife - 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Agreement.

• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board - General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan approval prior to construction activities, and permitting of isolated wetlands under the State’s Porter-Cologne Act.

• Central Valley Flood Protection Board– Board permit for activities associated with Laguna Creek.

• Elk Grove Water District - Water Supply Assessment.

• Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District - Approval of construction-related air quality permits.

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers– Issuance of 404 permit under the Clean Water Act for the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States and use of seasonal wetlands as a detention basin; and

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Consultation under the Endangered Species Act to determine impacts to special-status species and Incidental Take Statement.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the Project on January 25, 2013 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse, and the public. A public scoping meeting was held on February 8, 2013 to present the Project description to the public and interested agencies, and to receive comments from the public and interested agencies regarding the scope of the environmental analysis to be included in the Draft EIR. Concerns raised in response to the NOP were considered during preparation of the Draft EIR. The NOP and comments provided by interested parties in response to the NOP are presented in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.

The City provided the State Clearinghouse with the Notice of Completion (NOC) and Draft EIR for review on September 27, 2013. The City published a public notice of availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR on September 27, 2013, inviting comment from the general public, trustee agencies, responsible agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. The Draft EIR was available for review from September 27 through November 11, 2013. The City’s Planning Commission received comments on the Draft EIR at its meeting on November 7, 2013.

The Draft EIR contains a description of the Project, description of the environmental setting, identification of project impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. The Draft EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in the Draft EIR.

76


The City received oral comments at the November 7, 2013 Planning Commission meeting and received 48 comment letters regarding the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, the Final EIR responds to the written comments received as required by CEQA and identifies edits to the Draft EIR.

The City will review and consider the Final EIR. If the City finds that the Final EIR is "adequate and complete", the City Council may certify the Final EIR in accordance with CEQA. Upon review and consideration of the Final EIR, the City Council may take action to approve, revise, or reject the Project.

A Mitigation Monitoring Program would also be adopted in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into or imposed upon the project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. This Mitigation Monitoring Program will be designed to ensure that these measures are carried out during project implementation, in a manner that is consistent with the EIR.

IV. GENERAL FINDINGS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD

For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City’s findings and determinations consists of the following documents and testimony, at a minimum:

• The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in relation to the Project (e.g., Notice of Availability).

• The Silverado Village Draft EIR and Final EIR and technical materials cited in the documents. • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment period

on the NOP (Draft EIR Appendix A); • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment period

on the Draft EIR (Final EIR Chapter 2.0); • All non-draft and/or non-confidential reports and memoranda prepared by the City and

consultants in relation to the EIR. • Minutes and transcripts of the discussions regarding the Project and/or Project components

at public hearings held by the City. • The Elk Grove General Plan; • Elk Grove Municipal Code Title 23, Zoning, and all other Municipal Code provisions cited in

materials prepared by or submitted to the City; • Staff reports associated with City Council and Planning Commission meetings on the Project. • Any and all resolutions adopted by the City regarding the Project, and all staff reports,

analyses, and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions; and • Those categories of materials identified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6.

The City Council has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the Project, even if not every document was formally presented to the City Council or delivered to City Staff and stored in City files specifically generated in connection with the Project.

77


The City Clerk is the custodian of the administrative record. The documents and materials that constitute the administrative record are available for review at the City of Elk Grove City Hall, at 8401 Laguna Palms Way, Elk Grove, CA 95758.

CONSIDERATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

In adopting these Findings, this City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to this Council, the decision-making body of the lead agency, which reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the Project. By these findings, this City Council ratifies, adopts, and incorporates the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the Final EIR. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Final EIR represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City.

SEVERABILITY

If any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the Project, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.

CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE PLANS AND ORDINANCES

The Elk Grove General Plan was adopted in 2003 and has been amended through 2013. The City amended the General Plan to include the Sustainability Element in 2013. The City’s Housing Element is currently undergoing an update. The General Plan includes goals, objectives, and policies for growth management in the City.

The Project site is designated by the General Plan Land Use Policy Map as Rural Residential, Low Density Residential, and Commercial/Office/Multi-Family. The Project, which includes single family uses, a multi-family lodge, the Village 3 community facility, parks and trails, the wetland preserve, and infrastructure proposed by the Project are consistent with the General Plan, including the land use designations, as described under Impact 3.9-1 in the Draft EIR.

The Project site is zoned RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, RD- 5(F), and O. The Project site will be rezoned to Silverado Village SPA and the SPA document will ensure the Project’s consistency with the City’s Zoning requirements. As described under Impact 3.9-1 in the Draft EIR, the Project is consistent with the applicable adopted land use planning policies and regulations.

V. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS A. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON RIPARIAN

HABITAT OR OTHER SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL

78


PLANS, POLICIES, REGULATIONS OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-8)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to affect riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities is described at pages 3.3-31 and 3.3-32 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.3-7, 3.3-8, 3.3-9, and 3.3-10.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

(1) Effects of Mitigation and Remaining Impacts. Mitigation measures 3.3-9 and 3.3-10 require the Project Applicant to ensure that the Section 404 permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife are valid and active and to comply with the requirements and recommendations of these agreements and permits. The Section 404 permit requires the Project Applicant to establish, maintain, and monitor a 64.45-acre preserve on the northern portion of the Project site, containing 5.75 acres of avoided and preserved waters of the United States, including 5.06 acres of avoided and preserved vernal pools, 0.32 acres of avoided and preserved seasonal wetland, and 0.37 acres of avoided and preserved Whitehouse Creek. The Section 404 permit requires the Project to compensate for the direct loss of 8.31 acres of waters of the U.S., including 4.94 acres of vernal pools, 1.09 acres of seasonal wetland, 2.25 acres of pond, 0.02 acres of ephemeral drainage and 0.01 acre of creek through creating 8.80 acres of wetlands (6.17 acres of vernal pools and 2.63 acres of seasonal wetlands) within the on-site preserve area and creating 2.08 acres of seasonal wetlands off-site. The Section 404 permit requires the Project Applicant to create 6.25 acres of seasonal wetlands off-site to compensate for the indirect loss of functions associated with 12.39 acres of bermed pond that would be impacted by the Project. Specific requirements for the operation and maintenance of the preserve are included in the Section 404 permit to ensure long-term viability of on-site mitigation. The Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement requires mitigation for loss of 2.25 acres of aquatic habitat and includes specific measures to address potential impacts to special-status species. While there are mitigation measures presented in this EIR that are intended to minimize the impacts to the extent feasible, there is a finite quantity of Northern Hardpan Valley Hardpan Vernal Pool in California and the Elk Grove area, the Project would result in a reduction in that finite quantity. The loss of the habitat cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. This would represent a significant and unavoidable impact of the Project.

(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project

79


associated with impacts to scenic resources and visual character, as more fully stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section X, below.

B. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 1. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CONFLICT WITH AN APPLICABLE PLAN, ORDINANCE, OR

POLICY ESTABLISHING MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THE STATE HIGHWAYS CIRCULATION SYSTEM. (EIR IMPACT 3.12-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to impact State highway facilities, specifically State Route 99 and Interstate 5, is discussed at pages 3.12-15 and 3.12-16 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. Implementation of capital and operational mobility enhancements and the payment of a fee for the Project’s fair-share contribution toward such enhancements would less the significant impact associated with SR 99 and I-5, as discussed on pages 3.12-15 and 3.12-16 of the Draft EIR. However, as described on pages 3.12-15 and 3.12-16 of the Draft EIR, there are no feasible mitigation measures available to the City at this time.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

(1) Effects of Mitigation and Remaining Impacts. As identified on pages 3.12-15 and 3.12-16 of the Draft EIR, implementation of capital and operational mobility enhancements and the payment of a fee for the Project’s fair-share contribution toward such enhancements would serve as mitigation to lessen the significant impact associated with SR 99 and I-5. However, these State highway facilities are under the exclusive jurisdiction of Caltrans (Streets and Highways Code, Section 90). The City is not aware of any plan, enforceable by the City that would ensure funding of these improvements. While the Project would be required to pay a roadway fee pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims that would be used to fund designated regional traffic improvements in the State highway system, this fee is not considered feasible mitigation because there is not sufficient evidence in the record to find that the fee program is sufficiently certain and can be implemented over a defined period of time, as discussed on pages 3.12-15 and 3.12-16 of the Draft EIR. Therefore, this would represent a significant and unavoidable impact of the Project.

(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with impacts to important or unique farmlands, as more fully stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section X, below.

80


VI. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH ARE MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL A. AESTHETICS 1. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION MAY RESULT IN LIGHT AND GLARE IMPACTS. (EIR IMPACT 3.1-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project introduce new sources of light and glare that would have a significant impact is discussed at pages 3.1-9 through 3.1-11 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that implementation of mitigation measures 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3 would ensure that all exterior lighting associated with the Project is properly shielded and directed downward in order to eliminate light spillage onto adjacent properties, reduce impacts to “dark skies” to the greatest extent feasible, and reduce potential daytime glare impacts by ensuring that the multifamily and clubhouse facilities minimize use of reflective surfaces. Mitigation measures 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3 would reduce impacts associated with light and glare to a less than significant level. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

B. AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE 1. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE A VIOLATION OF AN AIR QUALITY

STANDARD OR CONTRIBUTE SUBSTANTIALLY TO AN EXISTING OR PROJECTED AIR QUALITY VIOLATION. (EIR IMPACT 3.2-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in temporary construction related air quality impacts is discussed at pages 3.2-14 through 3.3-19 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.2-1 and 3.2-2.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that implementation of Mitigation measures 3.3-1 and 3.3-2 would implementation of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Basic Constriction Emission Control Measures and the Enhanced Exhaust

81


Control Practices to reduce air pollutant emissions. Mitigation measures 3.3-1 and 3.3-2 would reduce construction emissions to a less than significant level. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR

THROUGH HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON INVERTEBRATE SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-1)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to have a direct or indirect impact on special-status invertebrate species is discussed at pages 3.3-14 through 3.3-16 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measure 3.3-1.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the impacts to special-status invertebrate species will be mitigated to a less than significant level as Mitigation measure 3.3-1 requires the Project to adhere to the USFWS Incidental Take Permit which requires the preservation of existing vernal pool habitat at a 2:1 ratio (17.56 acres of wetted vernal pool crustacean habitat to be preserved to compensate for 5.05 directly-affected acres and 3.73 indirectly affected acres), measures to address stormwater quality, notification procedures in the event of death or harm of a listed species, and constructed monitoring to ensure compliance with construction-related impact avoidance measures. This measure will ensure that the potential impacts to vernal pool tadpole shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, midvalley fairy shrimp, and California linderiella are reduced to a less than significant level. Any remaining impacts related to special-status invertebrate species after implementation of Mitigation measure 3.3-1 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

82

skyles

Typewritten Text


2. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON BIRD SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-3)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to have a direct or indirect impact on special-status bird species is discussed at pages 3.3-19 through 3.3-25 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.3-2, 3.3-3, 3.3-4, and 3.3-5.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the impacts to special-status bird species will be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation of mitigation measures 3.3-2, 3.3-3, 3.3-4, and 3.3-5. Mitigation measure 3.3-2 will ensure that if burrowing owls are present on the Project site, the burrowing owls will be avoided or relocated. Mitigation Measures 3.3-3 will ensure that if migratory birds or raptors are nesting on the Project site, the nests will not be significantly disturbed during construction activities. Mitigation Measure 3.3-4 requires the Project Applicant to preserve 126.39 acres of suitable Swainson’s hawk habitat. Mitigation Measure 3.3-5 will ensure that if Swainson’s hawk is nesting on the Project site, the nests will not be significantly disturbed during construction activities.. Any remaining impacts related to special-status plant species after implementation of mitigation measures 3.3-2, 3.3-3, 3.3-4, and 3.3-5 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

3. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON MAMMAL SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-5)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to have a direct or indirect impact on special-status mammal species is discussed at pages 3.3-25 and 3.3-26 of the Draft EIR.


83


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the impacts to special-status mammal species will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.3-6 would ensure that if bats are roosting on the Project site, the bat roosts will not be significantly disturbed during construction activities. Any remaining impacts related to special-status mammal species after implementation of mitigation measure 3.3-6 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

4. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HABITAT MODIFICATIONS, ON BIRD SPECIES IDENTIFIED AS CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, OR SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS, OR BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE OR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-6)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to have a direct or indirect impact on special-status plant species is discussed at pages 3.3-26 through 3.3-29 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the impacts to special-status plant species will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.3-7 would require the relocation and transplanting of populations of Dwarf downingia and Legenere that would otherwise by lost as a result of the Project and mitigation measure 3.3-8 would require pre-construction surveys for special-status plant species (Peruvian dodder, Slender Orcutt grass, and Sanford’s arrowhead) and the relocation and transplanting of any identified populations of Dwarf downingia and Legenere that would otherwise by lost as a result of the Project. Any remaining impacts related to special-status plant species after implementation of mitigation measures 3.3-7 and 3.3-8 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

84


5. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON WETLANDS, INCLUDING FEDERALLY PROTECTED AS DEFINED BY SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT, THROUGH DIRECT REMOVAL, FILLING, HYDROLOGICAL INTERRUPTION, OR OTHER MEANS. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-7)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in adverse effects on protected wetlands is discussed at pages 3.4-29 through 3.3-31 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the impacts to protected wetlands will be mitigated to a less than significant level as Mitigation measures 3.3-9 and 3.3-10 require the Project Applicant to ensure that the Section 404 permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife are valid and active and to comply with the requirements and recommendations of these agreements and permits. The Section 404 permit requires the Project Applicant to establish, maintain, and monitor a 64.45-acre preserve on the northern portion of the Project site, containing 5.75 acres of avoided and preserved waters of the United States, including 5.06 acres of avoided and preserved vernal pools, 0.32 acres of avoided and preserved seasonal wetland, and 0.37 acres of avoided and preserved Whitehouse Creek. The Section 404 permit requires the Project to compensate for the direct loss of 8.31 acres of waters of the U.S., including 4.94 acres of vernal pools, 1.09 acres of seasonal wetland, 2.25 acres of pond, 0.02 acres of ephemeral drainage and 0.01 acre of creek through creating 8.80 acres of wetlands (6.17 acres of vernal pools and 2.63 acres of seasonal wetlands) within the on-site preserve area and creating 2.08 acres of seasonal wetlands off-site. The Section 404 permit requires the Project Applicant to create 6.25 acres of seasonal wetlands off-site to compensate for the indirect loss of functions associated with 12.39 acres of bermed pond that would be impacted by the Project. Specific requirements for the operation and maintenance of the preserve are included in the Section 404 permit to ensure long-term viability of on-site mitigation. The Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement requires mitigation for loss of 2.25 acres of aquatic habitat and includes specific measures to address potential impacts to special-status species. Any remaining impacts related to protected wetlands after implementation of mitigation measures 3.3-9 and 3.3-10 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

85


6. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CONFLICT WITH LOCAL POLICIES OR CODES PROTECTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, SUCH AS ELK GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 19.12. (EIR IMPACT 3.3-10)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to conflict with local policies or codes protecting biological resources is discussed at pages 3.3-32 through 3.3-38 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.3-11 and 3.3-12

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that conflict with local policies or codes protecting biological resources, specifically Elk Grove Municipal Code Chapter 19.12, will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measures 3.3-11 and 3.3-12 will ensure that the potential impacts to protected trees are minimized to the extent possible and that the Project compensated for the loss of any trees in compliance with the City of Elk Grove Tree Preservation and Protection Chapter 19.12. Any remaining impacts related to Chapter 19.12 after implementation of mitigation measures 3.3-11 and 3.3-12 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

D. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION MAY CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE TO A SIGNIFICANT

HISTORICAL OR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE, OR DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY DESTROY OR DISTURB A UNIQUE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE OR HUMAN REMAINS. (EIR IMPACT 3.4-1)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to have an impact on a significant historical, archaeological, or paleontological resource or human remains is discussed at pages 3.4-8 through 3.4-10 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measure 3.4-1 and 3.4-2.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts to significant historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources or human remains will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.4-1 would ensure that the wire-wrapped redwood stave pipe on the Project site is appropriately documented and mitigated and implementation of

86


mitigation measure 3.4-2 would ensure that if an previously undiscovered cultural or paleontologic resources or human remains are encountered, appropriate steps will be taken to identify the significance of the resources and mitigate any potential impacts. Any remaining impacts related to cultural or archeological resources after implementation of mitigation measures 3.4-1 and 3.4-2 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 1. IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT MAY RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL SOIL

EROSION OR THE LOSS OF TOPSOIL. (EIR IMPACT 3.5-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil is discussed at pages 3.5-12 and 3.5-13 and of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts to risks associated with soil erosion or loss of topsoil will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-1 requires an approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes best management practices for grading, and preservation of topsoil and mitigation measure 3.5-2 requires the Project Applicant to submit an erosion control plan to the City which incorporates design measures that treat 85-90 percent of annual average stormwater runoff in accordance with the standards of the California Stormwater Best Management Practice New Development and Redevelopment Handbook. Any remaining impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil after implementation of mitigation measures 3.5-1 and 3.5-2 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

2. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE LOCATED ON A GEOLOGIC UNIT OR SOIL THAT IS UNSTABLE, OR THAT COULD BECOME UNSTABLE AS A RESULT OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION, AND

87


POTENTIALLY RESULT IN LANDSLIDE, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE, LIQUEFACTION OR COLLAPSE. (EIR IMPACT 3.5-3)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to be exposed to impacts from unstable soils is discussed at pages 3.5-13 through 3.5-15 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts to risks associated with unstable soils will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-3 requires a geotechnical report to be prepared for the Project and would ensure that appropriate measures are implemented to reduce potential impacts associated with unstable soils. Any remaining impacts related to unstable soils after implementation of mitigation measure 3.5-3 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

3. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE LOCATED ON EXPANSIVE SOILS, POTENTIALLY CREATING SUBSTANTIAL RISKS TO LIFE OR PROPERTY (EIR IMPACT 3.5-4)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to be exposed to impacts from expansive soils is discussed at pages 3.5-15 through 3.5-16 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts to risks associated with unstable soils will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-3 requires a geotechnical report to be prepared for the Project and would ensure that appropriate measures are implemented to reduce potential impacts associated with expansive soils. Any remaining impacts related to expansive soils after implementation of mitigation measure 3.5-3 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose

88


the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

4. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO LOCATE SEPTIC FACILITIES ON SOILS INCAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SUPPORTING THE USE OF SEPTIC TANKS OR ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS. (EIR IMPACT 3.5-5)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in impacts to soils associated with septic facilities is discussed at pages 3.5-16 through 3.5-17 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts associated with a potential septic system at the park site will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-3 requires an evaluation of the ability of the soils at the park site to accommodate a septic system if a septic system is proposed and, if the soils do not have the capacity to support a septic system, requires the park site be connected to the public sewer system or that restroom facilities shall be prohibited. Any remaining impacts related to expansive soils after implementation of mitigation measure 3.5-4 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

F. GREENHOUSE GASES AND CLIMATE CHANGE 1. THE PROJECT MAY GENERATE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY,

THAT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, OR CONFLICT WITH AN APPLICABLE PLAN, POLICY, OR REGULATION ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING THE EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE GASES. (EIR IMPACT 3.6-1)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is discussed at pages 3.6-9 of the Draft EIR.


89


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts with greenhouse gas emissions will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.6-1 requires the Project to implement the applicable City of Elk Grove Climate Action Plan measures, consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b)(2). Any remaining impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions after implementation of mitigation measure 3.6-1 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 1. THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD THROUGH THE ROUTINE

TRANSPORT, USE, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OR THROUGH THE REASONABLY FORESEEABLE UPSET AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS INVOLVING THE RELEASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT. (EIR IMPACT 3.7-1)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to be exposed to hazards or hazardous materials is discussed at pages 3.7-12 and 3.7-14 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring Program: Mitigation measures 3.7-1, 3.7-2, and 3.7-3.

(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts to risks associated with the potential for the Project to create a hazard through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or through the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials, including hazards associated with abandoned wells, possible abandoned septic systems, and pre-existing undiscovered hazards will be mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures 3.7-1 and 3.7-2 require removal of existing wells and septic systems in accordance with the requirements of Sacramento County Environmental Health Division. Mitigation measure 3.7-3 requires that construction be halted in the vicinity of any previously undiscovered soil staining, soil odors, or potentially non-hazardous soil artifacts, if such conditions are discovered during construction, and that a licensed geotechnical engineer evaluate the conditions and submit recommendations to be implemented by the Project Applicant following City acceptance of the recommendations. Any remaining impacts related to abandoned wells, existing septic systems, or previously undiscovered soil hazards after implementation of mitigation measures 3.7-1, 3.7-2, and 3.7-3 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been

90


required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 1. THE PROJECT COULD RESULT IN WATER QUALITY IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION,

SILTATION, OR POLLUTION, INCLUDING THE POTENTIAL TO VIOLATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION. (EIR IMPACT 3.8-1)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in water quality impacts associated with erosion, siltation, or pollution during construction is discussed at pages 3.8-17 and 3.8-18 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts associated with construction-related water quality will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-1 requires the Project applicant to submit a NOI and SWPPP to the RWQCB in accordance with the NPDES General Construction Permit requirements.. Any remaining impacts related to water quality associated with Project construction after implementation of mitigation measure 3.5-1 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

2. THE PROJECT COULD RESULT IN WATER QUALITY IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION, SILTATION, OR POLLUTION, INCLUDING THE POTENTIAL TO VIOLATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS DURING OPERATION. (EIR IMPACT 3.8-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in water quality impacts associated with erosion, siltation, or pollution during operation is discussed at pages 3.8-18 through 3.8-20 of the Draft EIR.


91


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts associated with result in water quality impacts associated with erosion, siltation, or pollution during Project operation will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measure 3.5-2 requires the Project applicant to prepare and submit a Post-Construction Stormwater Quality Control Plan in accordance with the most recent version of the Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region. Post–construction source and treatment controls shall be designed in accordance with the City of Elk Grove Improvement Standards and the Stormwater Quality Design Manual. Any remaining impacts related to increased storm water runoff after implementation of mitigation measure 3.5-2 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

3. THE PROJECT WOULD ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD NOT RESULT IN FLOODING, BUT COULD CREATE OR CONTRIBUTE RUNOFF IN EXCESS OF THE CAPACITY OF STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. (EIR IMPACT 3.8-4)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in increased runoff resulting from changes to the existing drainage pattern is discussed at pages 3.8-21 through 3.8-23 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts associated with in increased runoff resulting from changes to the existing drainage pattern will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measures 3.8-1 requires the Project to contribute its fair-share to the cost of the necessary Bond Road Trunk Drainage improvements that are needed to accommodate the Project and requires that the portion of the Project site served by such improvements (Village 1-A) is not constructed until the improvements are completed. Any remaining impacts related to changes to the drainage pattern after implementation of mitigation measure 3.8-1 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within

92


the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

I. NOISE 1. EXPOSURE OF PERSONS TO, OR GENERATION OF NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF APPLICABLE

STANDARDS - EXPOSURE OF PROJECT RESIDENTS TO EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE. (EIR IMPACT 3.10-2)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to expose Project residents to exterior traffic noise in excess of applicable standards is discussed at pages 3.10-10 through 3.10-13 of the Draft EIR.


(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that impacts associated with exposure of Project residents to traffic noise will be mitigated to a less than significant level as mitigation measures 3.10-1 and 3.10-2 require construction of a soundwall and noise attenuating features that would reduce exposure to traffic noise to conditionally acceptable levels. Any remaining impacts related to Project exposure to traffic noise after implementation of mitigation measures 3.10-1 and 3.10-2 would not be significant. As authorized by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that changes or alterations have been required herein, incorporated into the project, or required as a condition of project approval, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impact listed above, and as identified in the FEIR. The City further finds that the change or alteration in the project or the requirement to impose the mitigation as a condition of project approval is within the jurisdiction of the City to require, and that this mitigation is appropriate and feasible.

J. PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 1. THE PROJECT MAY RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE

CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES. (EIR IMPACT 3.11-3)

(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in significant impacts associated with construction and operation of parks and recreation facilities is discussed at page 3.11-12 of the Draft EIR.

(b) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of parks and recreation facilities are addressed in Chapters 3.1 through 3.10, 3.12, and 3.13 of the Draft EIR and appropriate findings are made under Sections V, VI (A through I), and VII of these Findings. No additional findings are necessary to address Impact 3.11-3.

93


VII. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THOSE IMPACTS WHICH ARE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR LESS THAN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE Specific impacts within the following categories of environmental effects were found to be less than significant as set forth in more detail in the Draft EIR and Final EIR.

Aesthetics: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant: 3.3-1.

Air Quality: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.2-1, 3.2-3, 3.2-4, and 3.2-5.

Biological Resources: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.3-2, 3.3-4, 3.3-9, and 3.3-11.

Geology and Soils: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant: 3.5-1.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant or to have no impact: 3.7-2 and 3.7-3.

Hydrology and Water Quality: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.8-3, 3.8-5, and 3.8-6.

Land Use and Population: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant: 3.9-1.

Noise: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.10-1 and 3.10-3.

Public Services and Recreation: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.11-1 and 3.11-2.

Traffic and Circulation: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.12-1, 3.12-3, 3.12-4, 3.12-5, and 3.12-6.

Utilities: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant: 3.13-1, 3.13-2, 3.13-3, 3.13-4, and 3.13-5.

The above impacts are less than significant because the EIR determined that each impact is less than significant for the Project.

VIII. IMPACTS ADDRESSED IN A PREVIOUS EIR The City’s General Plan was adopted by the City Council on November 19, 2003 and reflects amendments through July 2013. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts associated with General Plan implementation. The General Plan land use designations for the Project site that were analyzed in the General Plan EIR had the potential for up to 1,090 housing units on the Project site (150 acres of Low Density Residential =

94


1,050 housing units and 80 acres of Rural Residential = 40 housing units). The General Plan EIR anticipated development of the entire Project site. The Project would result in 308 fewer units than anticipated on the Project site in the General Plan EIR. The Project also designates 93.7 acres of the 230-acre site for open space uses, including a wetland preservation area, and thus would result in less disturbance and development than was anticipated in the General Plan EIR. The Project would result in population and housing, and as a result would have less traffic and associated air quality and noise impacts as well as less demand for utilities and public services than anticipated in the General Plan EIR. The Project would have less of a contribution to cumulative impacts than was anticipated for the Project site in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the environmental analysis and conclusions of the General Plan EIR.

The General Plan EIR evaluated the full range of environmental impacts anticipated with buildout of the General Plan land uses. The following is a summary of the impacts identified in the General Plan EIR that are relevant to subsequent development activities that may involve implementation of various measures associated with the Project. These subsequent development activities, such as the Project, are required to be reviewed for compliance with the General Plan and to comply with relevant mitigation measures adopted in the General Plan EIR to mitigate cumulative impacts. All of the mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR were incorporated into the General Plan or were included in a subsequent policy document, such as the Design Guidelines, and as are applied to and required of the Project.

Development has occurred in the City and throughout the region since the adoption of the General Plan. However, the General Plan EIR anticipated that development would occur and conditions in the City are consistent with the evaluation in the General Plan EIR, which identified increases in traffic, air pollutant emissions, noise, population and housing, an increased demand for public services and utilities, and the potential for development to reduce the amount of agricultural resources and open space and to have impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards, hydrology and soils.

The City makes the following findings regarding impacts addressed in the General Plan EIR.

A. POPULATION AND HOUSING 1. POPULATION AND HOUSING INCREASES - IMPACT 4.3.1

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan could result in population and housing projections that may exceed the SACOG projections. This is a less than significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.3-14 through 4.3-16.

b) Mitigation Measures: None required.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with population and housing increases, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects

95


on the environment related to population and housing that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to population and housing increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.3.1 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.3.1.

2. JOBS-HOUSING BALANCE - IMPACT 4.3.2:

a) Impact: The increase in the number of employed persons versus the increase in housing units may result in a jobs-housing imbalance. This is considered a less than significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.13-16 and 4.13-17.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with jobs-housing balance, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to jobs-housing balance that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to jobs-housing balance will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.3.2 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.3.2.

B. TRAFFIC 1. LOCAL ROADWAY SYSTEM - IMPACT 4.5.1:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan would result in increased traffic volumes, volume-to-capacity ratios, and a decrease in LOS on area roadways during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.5-52 and 4.5-80. Impacts in the Project vicinity include:

- Bond Road 4 Lanes (East Stockton Boulevard to Elk Grove Florin Road) – LOS F (eastbound) and LOS E (westbound)

- Bond Road 4 Lanes (Elk Grove Florin Road to Bradshaw Road) – LOS C (eastbound) and LOS B (westbound)

- Waterman Road 4 Lanes (Calvine Road to Bond Road) – LOS C (northbound) and LOS B (southbound)

96


- Waterman Road 4 Lanes (Bond Road to Grant Line Road) – LOS B (northbound) and LOS A (southbound)

b) Mitigation Measures: MM 4.5.1 - The City shall coordinate and participate with the City of Sacramento, Sacramento County and Caltrans on roadway improvements that are shared by the jurisdictions in order to improve operations. This may include joint transportation planning efforts, roadway construction and funding. (General Plan Draft EIR page 4.5-80)

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with the local roadway system, with the exception of those impacts specific to the Project site addressed under Impact 3.12-1 of the Silverado Village Draft EIR. There is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to local roadway facilities will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR.

MM 4.5.1 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented through revising the General Plan to include Policy CI-2. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that MM 4.5.1 has been complied with during the City’s processing and review of the Project. The City Council further finds that there are no adopted regional plans for the funding or development of regional roadway facilities that provide certainty regarding funding, facility improvements, and timing that the Project Applicant may participate in. Therefore, MM 4.5.1 has been undertaken by the Project to the extent feasible.

2. STATE HIGHWAYS - IMPACT 4.5.2

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan would result in increased traffic volumes, V/C ratios, and a decrease in LOS on state highways during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This is considered a significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR page 4.5-81.

b) Mitigation Measures: MM 4.5.1 - The City shall coordinate and participate with the City of Sacramento, Sacramento County and Caltrans on roadway improvements that are shared by the jurisdictions in order to improve operations. This may include joint transportation planning efforts, roadway construction and funding. (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.5-80 and 4.5-81)

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with the local roadway system, with the exception of those impacts addressed under Impact 3.12-2 of the Silverado Village Draft EIR. There is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to local roadway facilities will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR.

97


MM 4.5.1 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented through revising the General Plan to include Policy CI-2. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that MM 4.5.1 has been complied with during the City’s processing and review of the Project. The City Council further finds that there are no adopted regional plans for the funding or development of regional roadway facilities that provide certainty regarding funding, facility improvements, and timing that the Project Applicant may participate in. Therefore, MM 4.5.1 has been undertaken by the Project to the extent feasible.

C. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES 1. PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES - IMPACT 4.12.3.1:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan would increase demand for EGUSD facilities and services. This is considered a less than significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR page 4.12-26 through 4.12-28.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with public school facilities, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to public school facilities that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to public school facilities will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.3.1 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.3.1.

2. ELECTRICAL, NATURAL GAS, AND TELEPHONE SERVICES – IMPACT 4.12.7.1:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan would increase the demand for electric, telephone, and natural gas services. This is considered a less than significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-72 through 4.12-73.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with the demand for demand for electric, telephone and natural gas services, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to demand for

98


electric, telephone, and natural gas services that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to demand for electric, telephone, and natural gas services will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.7.1 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.7.1.

D. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 1. CONSISTENCY WITH RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS IN THE PLANNING AREA - IMPACT 4.2.3:

a) Impact. Implementation of the General Plan could impact land use plans or study areas outside of the city limits, but within the Planning Area. The General Plan EIR concluded that the impact was significant and unavoidable as a result of conflicts between Sacramento County General Plan policies and the City of Elk Grove’s vision of the Urban Study Area. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.2-30 through 4.2-32.

b) Mitigation Measures: None required. Implementation of General Plan policies CAQ-6 and associated action items, CI-21, LU-15 and LU-15 Action 1, and LU-38.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with land use planning consistency, including those associated with the Project. The Project would not have a contribution to cumulative land use planning consistency that was not addressed in cumulative analysis the General Plan EIR. The City Council finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.2.3 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.2.3 are required of the Project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that the Project has been required to implement the applicable policies and actions identified as mitigation measures for Impact 4.2.3.

2. LAND USE CONFLICTS IN THE PLANNING AREA - IMPACT 4.2.4:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan would increase the potential for land use conflicts outside of the City and within the Planning Area. This is a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.2-32 through 4.2-34.


99


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative land use conflicts. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative land use conflicts that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to population and housing increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.2.4 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.2.4.

3. CUMULATIVE POPULATION AND HOUSING INCREASES IMPACT - 4.3.3:

a) Impact: The population and housing unit increases at buildout of the General Plan may exceed SACOG’s population and housing projections for the Planning Area. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.13-17 through 4.13-19.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with population and housing increases, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative population and housing increases that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to population and housing increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.3.3 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.3.3.

4. CUMULATIVE HAZARD IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.4.5.

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan and potential development in the Urban Study Areas could result in site-specific hazards being encountered. This is considered a cumulative significant impact that would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.4-32 through 4.13-34.

b) Mitigation Measures: MM 4.4.5 The City shall ensure that new development near airports be designed to protect public safety from airport operations consistent with

100


recommendations and requirements of the Airport Land Use Commission, Caltrans, and the Federal Aviation Administration.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative hazards, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to potential contribution to cumulative hazards that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative hazards will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that MM 4.4.5 identified in the General Plan EIR is not applicable to the Project as the Project is not in the vicinity of an airport and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.4.5.

4. CUMULATIVE EXPOSURE TO HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH FACILITIES UTILIZING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - IMPACT 4.4.6.

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan and the potential development of the Urban Study Areas could result in the exposure of populated areas to accidental incidents and intentional acts at existing and future facilities utilizing hazardous materials. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.4-314 through 4.13-35.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with the cumulative exposure to hazards associated with facilities using hazardous materials, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative exposure to hazards associated with facilities using hazardous materials that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative exposure to hazards associated with facilities using hazardous materials will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.4.6 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.4.6.

5. CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC IMPACTS ON LOCAL ROADWAYS AND STATE HIGHWAYS - IMPACT 4.5.6:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan as well as potential development of the Urban Study Areas would contribute to significant impacts on local roadways

101


and state highways under cumulative conditions. This is considered a cumulative significant and unavoidable impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.5-86 through 4.5-89.

b) Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure 4.5.1.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with local roadways and State highway facilities, including those associated with the Project. As disclosed under Impact 3.12-2, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact on State highway facilities. The General Plan EIR identified that implementation of the General Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to local roadways and State highway facilities. The Project would result in less traffic than anticipated for the Project site in the General Plan EIR. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative traffic on State highway facilities that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not disclosed under Impact 3.12-2 or addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to traffic on local roadways and State highways will be significantly different than described in the General Plan EIR. MM 4.5.1 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented through revising the General Plan to include Policy CI-2. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that MM 4.5.1 has been complied with during the City’s processing and review of the Project. The City Council further finds that there are no adopted regional plans for the funding or development of regional roadway facilities that provide certainty regarding funding, facility improvements, and timing that the Project Applicant may participate in. Therefore, MM 4.5.1 has been undertaken by the Project to the extent feasible.

6. CUMULATIVE TRANSIT SYSTEM, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.5.7:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would contribute to a cumulative increase in the demand for transit service as well as bicycle and pedestrian usage. This is a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.5-89 through 4.5-91.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with transit system, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation under cumulative conditions, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to transit system, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation under cumulative conditions that

102


are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to transit system, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation under cumulative conditions will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.5.7 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.5.7.

7. CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC NOISE CONFLICTS - IMPACT 4.6.6:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas could result in increased traffic noise conflicts. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.6-39 through 4.6-40.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative traffic noise conflicts, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative traffic noise conflicts that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative traffic noise conflicts will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.6.6 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.6.6.

8. REGIONAL TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.6.8:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would result in impacts to regional noise attenuation levels. This is considered a cumulative significant and unavoidable impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.6-31 through 4.6-43.

b) Mitigation Measures: None available. (General Plan Draft EIR page 2.0-12)

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with regional traffic noise, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to regional traffic noise that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to regional traffic noise will be more

103


significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were adopted in association with the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.6.8 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.6.8.

9. REGIONAL AIR PLAN IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.7.4:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would exacerbate existing regional problems with ozone and particulate matter. This is considered a cumulative significant and unavoidable impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.7-19 through 4.7-22.

b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan policies CAQ-19 through CAQ-25 and MM 4.7.1. MM 4.7.1 The City shall require that private and public development projects utilize low emission vehicles and equipment as part of project construction and operation, unless determined to be infeasible. (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.7-13 and 4.7-22)

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with regional air plan impacts, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to the regional air plans that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to regional air plans will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that mitigation measure 3.2-2 (adopted at Section VI.B.1 of these Findings) will be required of the Project and fulfills the requirements of MM 4.7.1 identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.7.4. The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.7.4 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.7.4 are required of the Project.

10. CUMULATIVE WATER QUALITY IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.8.6:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with the potential development of the Urban Study Areas, could contribute to cumulative water quality impacts. This is considered a cumulative significant. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-55 through 4.8-58.

b) Mitigation Measures: Implementation of the above Policies CAQ-5, CAQ-11, CAQ-12, CAQ-14, CAQ-26, PF-5, and PF-11, and their associated action items, as well as

104


mitigation measure MM 4.8.3. (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-43, 4.8-44, and 4.8-63)

MM 4.8.3 Future land uses that are anticipated to utilize hazardous materials or waste shall be required to provide adequate containment facilities to ensure that surface water and groundwater resources are protected from accidental releases. This shall include double-containment, levees to contain spills, and monitoring wells for underground storage tanks, as required by local, state and federal standards.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative water quality, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative water quality that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative water quality will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. MM 4.8.3 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented by the City through revising the General Plan to include Policy CAQ-16. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with MM 4.8.3 and will not use quantities of hazardous materials or waste that would require containment facilities. The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.8.6 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.8.6 are required of the Project.

11. CUMULATIVE FLOOD HAZARDS - IMPACT 4.8.7:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would increase impervious surfaces and alter drainage conditions and rates in the Planning Area, which could contribute to cumulative flood conditions in the Sacramento River, Cosumnes River, and inland creeks. This is considered a cumulative significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-58 through 4.8-61.

b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan policies CAQ-11, CAQ-12, and SA-11 through SA-22 and their associated action items and MM 4.8.4. (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-46 and 4.8-61)

MM 4.8.4: The City shall require that all new projects not result in new or increased flooding impacts on adjoining parcels on upstream and downstream areas.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative flood hazards, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the

105


environment related to cumulative flood hazards that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative flood hazards will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. MM 4.8.4 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented by the City through revising the General Plan to include Policy SA-13. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with MM 4.8.4 and would not result in new or increased flooding impacts as described in Section 3.8, Impacts 3.8-4 and 3.8-6, of the Draft EIR). The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.8.7 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.8.7 are required of the Project.

12. CUMULATIVE WATER SUPPLY IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.8.8:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas, would contribute to an increased demand for water supply requiring increased groundwater production and the use of surface water supplies that could result in significant environmental impacts. This is considered a cumulative significant and unavoidable impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-61 through 4.8-63.

b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan policies CAQ-1 and PF-3 with their associated action items, and PF-4 and PF-5 and MM 4.8.5. (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.8-46 and 4.8-63)

MM 4.8.5: The City shall encourage water supply service providers and County Sanitation District 1 to design water supply and recycled water supply facilities in a manner that avoids and/or minimizes significant environmental effects. The City shall specifically encourage the Sacramento County Water Agency to design well facilities and operation to minimize surface flow effects to the Cosumnes River..

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative water supply, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative water supply that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative water supply will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. MM 4.8.4 was identified to mitigate this impact and was implemented by the City through revising the General Plan to include Policy CAQ-15. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that the MM 4.8.4 does not apply to the Project as the Project is not a water supply provider nor the sanitation district. The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General

106


Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.8.8 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.8.8 are required of the Project.

13. SOIL EROSION - IMPACT 4.9.4:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas could contribute to cumulative soil erosion impacts. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR page 4.9-11.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative soil erosion, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative soil erosion that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative soil erosion will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.9.4 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.9.4.

14. EXPANSIVE SOILS AND SEISMIC HAZARDS - IMPACT 4.9.5:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas could result in cumulative impacts to expansive soils and seismic hazards. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR page 4.9-12.

b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan Policy SA-23 and MM 4.9.2 (General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.9-10 and 4.9-12)

MM 4.9.2 Require a geotechnical report or other appropriate analysis be conducted that determines the shrink/swell potential and stability of the soil for public and private construction projects and identifies measures necessary to ensure stable soil conditions.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with expansive soils and seismic hazards, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative impacts to expansive

107


soils and seismic hazards that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that cumulative impacts to expansive soils and seismic hazards will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that mitigation measure 3.5-3 (adopted at Section VI.E.2 of these Findings) will be required of the Project and fulfills the requirements of MM 4.9.2 identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.9.5. The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.9.5 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.9.5 are required of the Project.

15. CUMULATIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.10.4:

a) Impact: I Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would contribute to cumulative impacts associated with significant effects to special-status plant and wildlife species and habitat loss. This would be a cumulative significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.10-51 through 4.10-56.

b) Mitigation Measures: MM 4.10.1a , MM 4.10.1b, and MM 4.10.3.

MM 4.10.1a: The City shall seek to preserve areas, where feasible, where special-status plant and animal species and critical habitat areas are known to be present or potentially occurring based on City biological resource mapping and data provided in the General Plan EIR or other technical material that may be adversely affected by public or private development projects. "Special-status" species are generally defined as species considered to be rare, threatened, endangered, or otherwise protected under local, state and/or federal policies, regulations or laws.

MM 4.10.1b: The City shall require a biological resources evaluation for private and public development projects in areas identified to contain or possibly contain special-status plant and animal species based on City biological resource mapping and data provided in the General Plan EIR or other technical material. The biological resources evaluation shall determine the presence/absence of these special-status plant and animal species on the site. The surveys associated with the evaluation shall be conducted during the appropriate seasons for proper identification of the species. Such evaluation will consider the potential for significant impact on special-status plant and animal species, and will identify feasible mitigation measures to mitigate such impacts to the satisfaction of the City and appropriate governmental agencies (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) where necessary (e.g., species listed under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act). Mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, the following:

108


· For special-status plant species: On- or off-site preservation of existing populations from direct and indirect impacts, seed and soil collection or plant transplant that ensures that the plant population is maintained.

· For special-status animal species: avoidance of the species and its habitat as well as the potential provision of habitat buffers, avoidance of the species during nesting or breeding seasons, replacement or restoration of habitat on- or off-site, relocation of the species to another suitable habitat area, payment of mitigation credit fees.

· Participation in a habitat conservation plan.

MM 4.10.3: The City shall require that impacts to riparian areas be mitigated to ensure that no net loss occurs, which may be accomplished by avoidance, revegetation and restoration onsite or creation of riparian habitat offsite.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with population and housing increases, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to population and housing that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to population and housing increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that that biological resources evaluations have been performed to identify potential impacts to special-status species and sensitive natural habitats and that mitigation has been required of the Project to protect special-status species and sensitive natural habitats and communities to the extent feasible(see mitigation measures adopted at Section VI.B of these Findings). The Council further finds that the mitigation measures adopted at Section VI.B of these Findings will be required of the Project and fulfills the requirements of MM 4.10.1a, 4.10.1b, and 4.10.3 identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.10.4.

16. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES - IMPACT 4.11.3:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development in the Urban Study Areas could contribute to the disturbance of known and undiscovered prehistoric and historic resources in the Elk Grove area. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.11-14 through 4.11-15.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with

109


historic and prehistoric resources, including those associated with the Project. There are no cumulative effects on the environment related to historic and prehistoric resources that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to historic and prehistoric resources will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.11.3 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.11.3.

17. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES - IMPACT 4.11.4:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas could contribute to the loss of paleontological resources in the Elk Grove area. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR page 4.11-16.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with paleontological resources, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to paleontologic resources that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to paleontologic resources will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 411.4 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.11.4.

18. CUMULATIVE FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES - IMPACT 4.12.1.2:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would contribute to the cumulative demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-10. through 4.12-12.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative demand for fire protection and emergency medical services, including those

110


associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative demand for fire protection and emergency medical services that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that cumulative impacts to cumulative demand for fire protection and emergency medical services will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.1.2 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.1.2.

19. CUMULATIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.12.2.2:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would result in the increase of the demand for cumulative law enforcement services. This is considered a less than significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-16 through 4.12-18.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with law enforcement, including those associated with the Project. There are no cumulative effects on the environment related to law enforcement that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to law enforcement increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.2.23.1 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.2.2.

20. CUMULATIVE PUBLIC SCHOOL IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.12.3.2:

Implementation of the General Plan as well as potential development of the Urban Study Areas, would result in cumulative public school impacts. These cumulative public school impacts are considered less than significant.



111


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with public schools, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to public schools that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to public schools will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.3.2 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.3.2.

21. CUMULATIVE WASTEWATER DEMANDS - IMPACT 4.12.4.4:

Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas and growth in the SRCSD service area would result in cumulative wastewater impacts. This is considered a cumulative significant impact.


b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan Policies PF-7 through PF-13; no specific mitigation measures identified.

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative wastewater demands, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative wastewater demands that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to cumulative wastewater demands will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that the Project is required to comply with all applicable General Plan policies and actions and that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.4.4 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.4.4.

22. CUMULATIVE SOLID WASTE IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.12.5.2:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would result in cumulative solid waste impacts. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-53 through 4.12-54.

112



c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with cumulative solid waste, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to cumulative solid waste that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to solid waste will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.5.2 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.5.2.

23. CUMULATIVE PARK AND RECREATION DEMANDS - IMPACT 4.12.6.2:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would result in cumulative park and recreation impacts. These cumulative impacts are considered less the significant. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-63 through 4.12-66.


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with parks and recreation, including those associated with the Project. There are no cumulative effects on the environment related to parks and recreation that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to parks and recreation will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.6.2 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.6.2.

24. CUMULATIVE ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE AND NATURAL GAS IMPACTS - IMPACT 4.12.7.3:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development in the Urban Study Areas would result in cumulative electric, telephone and natural gas service impacts. These are considered less than significant cumulative impacts. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.12-74 through 4.12-75.


113


c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed cumulative environmental impacts associated with electrical, telephone, and natural gas services and facilities, including those associated with the Project. There are no cumulative effects on the environment related to electrical, telephone, and natural gas services and facilities that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that cumulative impacts to electrical, telephone, and natural gas services and facilities will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that no mitigation measures were identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.12.7.3 and, therefore, no mitigation is required of the Project in association with Impact 4.12.7.3.

25. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO VISUAL RESOURCES - IMPACT 4.13.4:

a) Impact: Implementation of the General Plan along with potential development of the Urban Study Areas would result in the further conversion of the region's rural landscape to residential, commercial, and other land uses. This would contribute to the alteration of the visual resources in the region. This is considered a cumulative significant impact. Impact analysis and discussion of mitigation is located at General Plan Draft EIR pages 4.13-8 through 4.13-10.

b) Mitigation Measures: General Plan Policies CAQ-8 and LU-34 and associated action items and MM 4.13.2 and MM 4.13.3.

MM 4.13.2 The Design Guidelines shall include a provision to minimize the use of reflective materials in building design in order to reduce the potential impacts of daytime glare. (General Plan Draft EIR 4.13-7)

MM 4.13.3 The Citywide Design Guidelines shall include provisions for the design of outdoor light fixtures to be directed/shielded downward and screened to avoid adverse nighttime lighting spillover effects on adjacent land uses and nighttime sky glow conditions. (General Plan Draft EIR 4.13-8)

c) Finding: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(b), the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and that the certified General Plan EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with population and housing increases, including those associated with the Project. There are no effects on the environment related to population and housing that are peculiar to the parcel or Project that were not addressed in the General Plan EIR and there is not substantial new information that shows that impacts to population and housing increases will be more significant than described in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3(c), the City Council finds that mitigation measures 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3 (adopted at Section VI.A.12 of these Findings) will

114


be required of the Project and fulfill the requirements of MM 4.13.2 and 4.13.3 identified in the General Plan EIR for Impact 4.13.4. The City Council further finds that the Project is required to comply with the General Plan, including those policies that were identified to address Impact 4.13.4 and, as such, the policies and actions identified to address Impact 4.13.4 are required of the Project.

IMPACTS PECULIAR TO THE PROJECT OR PROJECT SITE The City finds that the policies and actions referenced in the General Plan EIR in Sections 4.1 through 4.13 were incorporated into the General Plan or were included in a subsequent policy document, such as the Design Guidelines, and as such are applied to and required of the Project. These are applied to the Project as uniform standards applicable to all projects in the City. Application of these adopted General Plan policies and actions as discussed in Sections 3.1 through 4.0 of the Silverado Village Draft EIR serve to substantially mitigate effects peculiar to the Project, including those impacts described above in Section VIII, based upon the substantial evidence provided by the General Plan EIR, and those impacts described in Sections V, VI, and VII of these findings based on the substantial evidence provided for the discussion and analysis of each impact in the Draft EIR as referenced in Sections V, VI, and VII.

IX. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 mandates that every EIR evaluate a no-project alternative, plus a feasible and reasonable range of alternatives to the Project or its location. The alternatives were formulated considering the project objectives outlined on page 5.0-1 of the Draft EIR. The alternatives analysis in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR provides a comparative analysis of the alternatives to the Project, including comparison of potential to result in significant impacts and significant and unavoidable impacts, for the consideration of reasonable feasible options for minimizing environmental consequences of a project.

As explained below, these findings describe and reject, for reasons documented in the EIR and summarized below, each one of the Project alternatives, and the City finds that approval and implementation of the Silverado Village Project is appropriate. The evidence supporting these findings is presented in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR.

Public Resources Code §21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” Where a lead agency has determined that, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, a project as proposed will still cause one or more significant environmental effect that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, the agency, prior to approving the project as mitigated, must first determine whether, with respect to such impacts, there are any feasible project alternatives that are both environmentally superior and feasible within the meaning of CEQA. Although an EIR must evaluate this range of potentially feasible alternatives, an agency decision-making body may ultimately conclude that a potentially feasible alternative is actually infeasible. (City of Santa Cruz, supra, 177 Cal.App.4th at p. 981, 999.) The failure of an alternative to fully satisfy project objectives determined to be important by decision-makers, or the fact that an alternative fails to promote

115


policy objectives of concern to such decision-makers, are grounds for finding an alternative to be infeasible. (Id. at pp. 992, 1000-1003.) Thus, even if a Project alternative will avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental effects of the Project as mitigated, the decision-makers may reject the alternative for such reasons.

Under CEQA, where a significant impact can be substantially lessened (i.e., mitigated to an "acceptable level") solely by the adoption of mitigation measures, the agency, in drafting its findings, has no obligation to consider the feasibility of alternatives with respect to that impact, even if an alternative would mitigate the impact to a greater degree than the proposed project. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002; Laurel Hills Homeowners Association v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521 (Laurel Hills); see also Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 730-731; and Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400-403.) Specifically, the CEQA Guidelines provide that “[t]he discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.6(a).) When a lead agency has determined that certain effects on the environment of a project are not significant, the lead agency does not need to discuss those impacts in detail within the environmental impact report. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21100.) Therefore, like mitigation measures, a lead agency is not required to consider the feasibility of implementing an alternative to a project unless the alternative will avoid or substantially lessen a significant impact. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.4(a)(3) [mitigation measures are not required for effects which are not found to be significant]; CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.6(a) [alternatives must focus on significant impacts of the Project and the ability of the alternative to avoid or substantially lessen such impacts].)

Under CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a), the alternatives to be discussed in detail in an EIR should be able to “feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project[.]” For this reason, the objectives described above in subsection A below provide the framework for defining possible alternatives. The selection of alternatives analyzed in the EIR took into account the Project objectives, and primary consideration was given to alternatives that would reduce the Project’s significant impacts that could not be mitigated to a level of less than significant while still meeting most of the basic Project objectives. Based on these objectives, the City developed three alternatives that it addressed in detail in the EIR, and another two alternatives that were considered but were not addressed in further detail.

Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines §15126.6, and in light of the Project objectives, the following alternatives to the Project were identified:

• Alternative 1 - No Project Alternative,

• Alternative 2 - Reduced Density and Reconfigured Project Alternative, and

• Alternative 3 - Reconfigured Project Alternative.

116


The City Council finds that that a good faith effort was made to evaluate a range of potentially feasible alternatives in the EIR that are reasonable alternatives to the Project and could feasibly obtain most of the basic objectives, even when the alternatives might impede the attainment of some of the Project objectives and might be more costly. (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(b).) As a result, the scope of alternatives analyzed in the EIR is reasonable. (See, e.g., Draft EIR, pp. 5.0-1 to 5.0-12)

A. IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES As described above, an EIR is required to identify a “range of potential alternatives to the project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one of more of the significant effects.” The alternatives to the Project selected for analysis in the EIR were developed to minimize significant environmental impacts while fulfilling the basic objectives of the Project. As described in Chapter 2, Project Description, the City has identified the following objectives for the Project:

• Create a high-quality residential development that is consistent with the General Plan;

• Provide a residential development that would assist the City in meeting its housing needs, including a range of housing types to serve the senior population;

• Emphasize preservation of open space and sensitive habitats;

• Implement the City’s Trail System Master Plan through providing an on-site trails network that is accessible by the general public and provides opportunities for connectivity with future trails on adjacent property; and

• Create a dual purpose stormwater/open space area.

The Project applicant, Vintara Holdings LLC/Silverado Homes, has submitted the following project objectives for the Silverado Village project.

• Consistency with the General Plan;

• Compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods;

• Respect the Project site’s existing natural features; and

• Creation of a unique age-restricted community that provides a mix of housing types and amenities, including the village core, club house, and swim facility.

B. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS IN EIR 1. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE:

The No Project Alternative is discussed on pages 5.0-3, 5.0-5, 5.0-6, and 5.0-7 of the Draft EIR. The No Project Alternative is the continuation of the existing current condition, which is an undeveloped site that has grassland vegetation and wetland, vernal pool, and riparian habitat areas, on the

117


Project site. Under this alternative, no Project entitlements would be granted and the Project would not be constructed and operated. The environmental impacts associated with the Project described in Sections 3.1 through 4.0 of the EIR would not occur. As a result, the No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior to the Project.

Findings: The No Project Alternative is rejected as an alternative because it would not achieve the Project’s objectives.

Explanation: This alternative would not realize the benefits of the Project nor achieve the Project objectives. The General Plan and Trail System Master Plan would not be implemented. The City has identified the Project site for rural residential, low density residential, and commercial/office/multi-family uses and the residential development that would assist the City in meeting its housing needs would not be constructed. The 68.1-acre wetland preserve would not be created and there would be no permanent protection of open space and habitats. The No Project Alternative would result in fewer significant environmental impacts than the Project, but would fail to meet any of the identified Project objectives.

2. REDUCED DENSITY AND RECONFIGURED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE:

The Reduced Density and Reconfigured Project Alternative is discussed on pages 5.0-3, 5.0-4, and 5.0-7 through 5.0-9 of the Draft EIR. This alternative includes the construction and operation of 111 single-family lots, 100 patio homes, and the Village 3 independent, assisted, and/or memory-care multifamily lodge and clubhouse, as described in greater detail in Chapter 5.0. Under this alternative, the residential lots would not be clustered and the wetland preserve would removed; wetland, riparian, creek, vernal pool, and drainage features would be preserved through permanent preservation easements on the individual lots created under this Alternative. The residential lots would be larger to accommodate the easements.

As described in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR, this alternative would reduce environmental impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation and circulation in comparison to the Project.

Findings: The Reduced Density and Reconfigured Project Alternative is rejected as an alternative because it is fails to meet several of the Project’s objectives.

Explanation: This alternative would not provide a high-quality residential development consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan designated the Project site for Rural Residential, Low Density Residential, and Commercial/Office/Multifamily uses would be far less than what was planned for the site in the General Plan, which plans for a minimum of 606 units (80 acres x 0.1 dwelling units per acre plus 146 acres x 4.1 dwelling units per acre plus 4 acres x 0 dwelling units per acre) and a maximum of xx units (80 units x 0.5 dwelling units per acre plus 146 units x 7 dwelling units per acre plus 4 acres x 30 dwelling units per acre). While this alternative would result in a reduction in environmental impacts as described in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR, it would not implement the vision of the General Plan for the Project site.

118


While this Project would provide a mix of housing types, due to the reduction in the number of residential units, this alternative is significantly inferior to the Project in regards to the objective associated with creating a high-quality residential development would assist the City in meeting its housing needs. While this alternative would provide for housing, it would provide significantly less housing than the Project and would not provide as much of a benefit as the Project in meeting the projected housing needs of the City. The City has been assigned a regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) of 7,402 units by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments for the 2013-2021 planning period. The Project would significantly assist the City in meeting its housing needs while this alternative would meet fewer housing needs. However, if fewer housing units were constructed in association with this alternative, the City’s remaining housing needs would need to be accommodated elsewhere in the City. As such, this alternative could divert projected growth to another location in the region or away from the City’s planned urban footprint, which could create inefficiencies and additional environmental impacts.

While this alternative would result in the preservation of the sensitive natural community (Northern Hardpan Valley Hardpan Vernal Pool) that is associated with the wetland, vernal pool, and riparian features spread throughout the Project site and would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact that the Project would have on this natural community, this alternative would not achieve the Project objective of implementing the Trail System Master Plan as the north-south trail location, and potentially the east-west trail, identified in the Trail System Master Plan would require disturbance of wetland, vernal pool, drainage, and/or riparian features on the Project site.

Therefore, while this alternative would result in reduced environmental impacts, it would not achieve primary Project objectives that include implementing two of the City’s long-term planning documents, the General Plan and the Trail System Master Plan.

CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative be identified among the alternatives that are analyzed in the EIR. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, an EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2)). The environmentally superior alternative is that alternative with the least adverse environmental impacts when compared to the proposed project.

As discussed in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR and summarized in Table 5.0-1 of the Draft EIR, the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. However, as required by CEQA, when the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the environmentally superior alternative among the others must be identified. Therefore, the Reduced Density and Reconfigured Project Alternative is the next environmentally superior alternative to the proposed Project.

As discussed above, the Reconfigured Project and Reduced Density Alternative would fail to meet three of the City’s five objectives for this Project. The Project is superior to this

119


alternative in terms of assisting the City in meeting its housing needs. The Project would be consistent with and implement the General Plan and Trails System Master Plan while this alternative would not implement either of these long-term planning documents. The range of housing types associated with the Project will serve a broader range of the public. The trail system proposed by the Project provides a public benefit in terms of recreation opportunities for the public. For these social and other benefits, the Project is deemed superior to the Reconfigured Project and Reduced Density Alternative.

3. RECONFIGURED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE:

The Reconfigured Project Alternative is discussed on pages 5.0-4 and 5.0-9 through 5.0-11 of the Draft EIR. The Reconfigured Project Alternative has the same unit count and proposed uses as the Project, but would reconfigure residential uses in the southwestern area of the Project site to reduce potential impacts to trees of local importance. Under this alternative, seven of the lots adjacent Quail Ranch Estates would be relocated to Lot F in order to provide an easement for the protection of existing trees along the western boundary of the Project site from Bond Road to Lot I.

Findings: The Reconfigured Project Alternative is rejected because it will not result in significant benefits in comparison to the Project and could introduce nuisances.

Explanation: This alternative would meet the objectives for the Project. As described in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR, this alternative would not avoid or reduce either of the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the Project. This alternative would reduce potential impacts to trees protected by the Tree Preservation and Protection Chapter of the Municipal Code. However, in avoiding impacts to trees, this alternative would introduce a potential nuisance by placing a public access corridor behind the Quail Ranch Estate lots that border the Project and behind the residential uses in Village 1-A. There would not be any residential lots fronting this corridor and it would have minimal visibility from public viewpoints. This alternative has minimal environmental benefits in comparison to the Project as discussed in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR and the environmental benefit associated with this alternative is not offset by the potential nuisance that could be created by the public access corridor.

For these economic, social, and other considerations, the Project is deemed superior to the Reconfigured Project Alternative.

X. STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO THE PROJECT FINDINGS As described in Section III of these Findings, the following significant and unavoidable impacts could occur with implementation of the Project:

• Impact 3.3-8: Potential to have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, specifically Northern Hardpan Valley Hardpan Vernal Pool, identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

120


• Impact 3.12-2: Potential to conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system: State highway facilities.

The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Project, and has determined that the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects. The reasons set forth below are based on the EIR and other information in the record. As set forth in the preceding sections, approving the Project will result in several significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level, even with the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures. As determined above, however, there are no additional feasible mitigation measures, nor are there feasible alternatives, that would mitigate or substantially lessen the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, despite these significant environmental effects, the City Council, in accordance with Public Resources Code Sections 21001, 21002.1(c), 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, chooses to approve the Project because, in its judgment, the following economic, social, and other benefits that the Project will produce will render the significant effects acceptable.

Substantial evidence supporting the benefits cited in this Statement of Overriding Considerations can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in the record of proceedings, as defined in Section IV, above. Any one of the following reasons is sufficient to demonstrate that the benefits of the Project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects, thereby justifying approval of the Project.

A. Housing Needs and RHNA Obligations. The Silverado Village Project serves the objective to assist in meeting the City’s housing needs allocated by SACOG and providing a variety of housing types, by providing a range of housing types (single family, small lot single family patio homes, and multi-family uses) and serving both general and senior populations.

B. Multi-generational Community. Silverado Village will provide an inclusive multigenerational approach to residential development by including neighborhoods oriented toward families and the general public and a community oriented toward seniors. The senior community will be provided for with a range of options from patio housing for mobile, active seniors to a multi-family lodge that will provide on-site services for seniors that may require assistance with living, whether it be some type of health care, assistance with transportation to shopping, or other needs.

C. Adequate Recreation Facilities. The Project would provide expanded opportunities for parks and recreation activities in the City by providing two park sites (6.1 acres) and a 3.1-acre multi-use trail system that provides for connectivity to planned trails on adjacent lands. These facilities would assist in meeting the parks and recreation needs of the City and the proposed multi-use trails would serve the surrounding community as well as the Project. The Project would provide parks and recreation facilities to residents of the City and the surrounding areas free of charge. Development of the Project would expand the availability of free and low-cost recreational activities within the community.

121


D. Road and Pedestrian/Bicycle Connectivity. Silverado Village will include pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and a multi-use trail system, that implement the City’s Trails Master Plan and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

E. Opportunities for Improved Public Health. The Project would allow for the expansion of parks and recreation uses and would include a multi-use trail that would encourage pedestrian and bicycle activities. Participation in outdoor recreation provides opportunities of improved health, welfare, happiness and overall well-being. It may also result in long-term savings related to health care costs related to obesity.

F. Environmental Benefits. By clustering residential development to avoid sensitive natural resources and open space, the Project would permanently preserve 93.7 acres of open space, including the 68.1-acre wetland preservation area. The wetland preservation area will provide opportunities for community education regarding the importance of wetland resources.

Based on the entire record and the EIR, the social and other benefits of the Project outweigh and override any significant unavoidable environmental effects that would result from future Project implementation. The City Council has determined that any environmental detriment caused by the Project has been minimized to the extent feasible through the mitigation measures identified herein, and, where mitigation is not feasible, has been outweighed and counterbalanced by the significant social, environmental, and other benefits of the Project to the City.

XI. SUMMARY A. Based on the foregoing Findings and the information contained in the record, the City Council has made one or more of the following Findings with respect to each of the significant environmental effects of the Project:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR.

2. To the extent that such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the City, those changes or alterations have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.

B. Based on the foregoing Findings and the information contained in the record, it is determined that:

1. All significant effects on the environment due to the approval of the Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible; and

122


2. Any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to the factors described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section X, above.

123

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

Silverado Village 1

INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15091(d), requires public agencies, as part of the certification of an environmental impact report, to adopt a reporting and monitoring program to ensure that changes made tot he project as conditions of project approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects are implemented. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) contained herein are intended to satisfy the requirements of CEQA as they relate to the Silverado Village Project (Project) in the City of Elk Grove (City). The MMRP is intended to be used by City staff, Project applicant, Project contractors, and mitigation monitoring personnel during implementation of the Project.

The MMRP will provide for monitoring of construction activities as necessary in-the-field identification and resolution of environmental concerns, and reporting to City staff. The MMRP will consist of the components described below.

COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST Table 1 contains a compliance-monitoring checklist that identifies all adopted mitigation measures, identification of agencies responsible for enforcement and monitoring, and timing of implementation.

FIELD MONITORING OF MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION During construction of the Project, the City of Elk Grove's designated construction inspector will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of mitigation measures. The inspector will report to the City of Elk Grove Department of Public Works, and will be thoroughly familiar with all plans and requirements of the project. In addition, the inspector will be familiar with construction contract requirements, construction schedules, standard construction practices, and mitigation techniques. Aided by Table 1, the inspector will typically be responsible for the following activities:

1. On-site, day to day monitoring of construction activities;

2. Reviewing construction plans to ensure conformance with adopted mitigation measures;

3. Ensuring contractor knowledge of and compliance with all appropriate conditions of project approval;

4. Evaluating the adequacy of construction impact mitigation measures, and proposing improvements to the contractors and City staff;

5. Requiring correction of activities that violate project mitigation measures, or that represent unsafe or dangerous conditions. The inspector shall have the ability and authority to secure compliance with the conditions or standards through the City of Elk Grove Public Works Department, if necessary;

6. Acting in the role of contact for property owners or any other affected persons who wish to register observations of violations of project mitigation measures, or unsafe or dangerous conditions. Upon

124

skyles

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 4

skyles

Typewritten Text

skyles

Typewritten Text

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

2 Silverado Village

receiving any complaints, the inspector shall immediately contact the construction representative. The inspector shall be responsible for verifying any such observations and for developing any necessary corrective actions in consultation with the construction representative and the City of Elk Grove Public Works Department;

7. Maintaining prompt and regular communication with City staff;

8. Obtaining assistance as necessary from technical experts, such as archaeologists and wildlife biologists, to develop site-specific procedures for implementing the mitigation measures adopted by the City for the project. For example, it may be necessary at times for a wildlife biologist to work in the field with the inspector and construction contractor to explicitly identify and mark areas to be avoided during construction; and

9. Maintaining a log of all significant interactions, violations of permit conditions or mitigation measures, and necessary corrective measures.

PLAN CHECK Many mitigation measures will be monitored via plan check during Project implementation. City staff will be responsible for monitoring plan check mitigation measures.

125

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-3

TA

BLE

1: M

ITIG

ATIO

N M

ON

ITO

RIN

G A

ND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRA

M

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

3.1

-1

Outd

oor

light

ing

shal

l be

des

igne

d so

tha

t lig

ht i

s no

t di

rect

ed o

ff th

e sit

e an

d th

e lig

ht s

ourc

e is

shie

lded

do

wnw

ard

from

ove

rhea

d vi

ewin

g an

d fr

om d

irec

t of

f-site

vie

win

g.

Ligh

t sp

ill a

nd g

lare

sha

ll no

t ex

ceed

0.1

foo

t-ca

ndle

on

adja

cent

pr

oper

ties.

The

se r

equi

rem

ents

sha

ll be

sho

wn

on t

he m

aste

r ho

me

plan

s for

the

singl

e fa

mily

uni

ts a

nd th

e pr

ojec

t im

prov

emen

t pla

ns fo

r th

e m

ultif

amily

, clu

bhou

se, a

nd p

arks

faci

litie

s.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of b

uild

ing

perm

its

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.1-2

St

reet

lig

ht f

ixtu

res

shal

l us

e lo

w-p

ress

ure

sodi

um la

mps

or

othe

r sim

ilar

light

ing

fixtu

re a

nd s

hall

be in

stal

led

and

shie

lded

in s

uch

a m

anne

r th

at n

o lig

ht r

ays

are

emitt

ed fr

om th

e fix

ture

at a

ngle

s ab

ove

the

hori

zont

al p

lane

. H

igh-

inte

nsity

disc

harg

e la

mps

sha

ll be

pro

hibi

ted.

Of

fsite

illu

min

atio

n sh

all n

ot e

xcee

d tw

o-fo

ot c

andl

es.

Stre

et l

ight

ing

plan

s sh

all

be s

ubm

itted

with

pro

ject

im

prov

emen

t pla

ns fo

r City

revi

ew a

nd a

ppro

val.

Prio

r to

appr

oval

of f

acili

ty

impr

ovem

ent p

lans

for p

roje

ct

road

way

s

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.1-3

Ex

teri

or b

uild

ing

mat

eria

ls on

mul

tifam

ily

and

nonr

esid

entia

l str

uctu

res

shal

l be

com

pose

d of

at l

east

50

perc

ent

low

-ref

lect

ance

non

-pol

ished

sur

face

s. Al

l bar

e m

etal

lic s

urfa

ces

shal

l be

pai

nted

with

flat

fini

shes

to re

duce

refle

cted

gla

re.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of b

uild

ing

perm

its

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.2-1

: To

red

uce

cons

truc

tion-

rela

ted

emiss

ions

, the

Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l im

plem

ent

the

follo

win

g SM

AQM

D Ba

sic

Cons

truc

tion

Emiss

ions

Con

trol

Mea

sure

s:

• Th

e fo

llow

ing

prac

tices

are

requ

ired

to c

ontr

ol fu

gitiv

e du

st fr

om a

co

nstr

uctio

n sit

e. C

ontr

ol o

f fug

itive

dus

t is

requ

ired

by

SMAQ

MD

Rule

403

and

enf

orce

d by

SM

AQM

D st

aff.

o

Wat

er a

ll ex

pose

d su

rfac

es t

wo

times

dai

ly. E

xpos

ed s

urfa

ces

incl

ude,

but a

re n

ot li

mite

d to

soil

pile

s, gr

aded

are

as, u

npav

ed

park

ing

area

s, st

agin

g ar

eas,

and

acce

ss ro

ads.

o

Cove

r or m

aint

ain

at le

ast t

wo

feet

of f

ree

boar

d sp

ace

on h

aul

truc

ks t

rans

port

ing

soil,

san

d, o

r ot

her

loos

e m

ater

ial o

n th

e sit

e. An

y ha

ul tr

ucks

that

wou

ld b

e tr

avel

ing

alon

g fr

eew

ays o

r

Thro

ugho

ut a

ll gr

adin

g an

d co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent/

Sac

ram

ento

M

etro

polit

an A

ir

Qual

ity

Man

agem

ent

Dist

rict

126

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

4 Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

m

ajor

road

way

s sho

uld

be co

vere

d.

o

Use

wet

pow

er v

acuu

m s

tree

t sw

eepe

rs to

rem

ove

any

visib

le

trac

kout

mud

or

dirt

ont

o ad

jace

nt p

ublic

roa

ds a

t lea

st o

nce

a da

y. Us

e of

dry

pow

er sw

eepi

ng is

pro

hibi

ted.

o

Li

mit

vehi

cle

spee

ds o

n un

pave

d ro

ads

to 1

5 m

iles

per

hour

(m

ph).

o

All

road

way

s, dr

ivew

ays,

sidew

alks

, an

d pa

rkin

g lo

ts t

o be

pa

ved

shou

ld b

e co

mpl

eted

as

soon

as

poss

ible

. In

addi

tion,

bu

ildin

g pa

ds s

houl

d be

laid

as

soon

as

poss

ible

afte

r gr

adin

g un

less

seed

ing

or so

il bi

nder

s are

use

d.

• Th

e fo

llow

ing

prac

tices

are

req

uire

d fo

r ex

haus

t em

issio

n co

ntro

l fo

r di

esel

-pow

ered

flee

ts w

orki

ng a

t a c

onst

ruct

ion

site.

Calif

orni

a re

gula

tions

lim

it id

ling

from

bot

h on

-roa

d an

d of

f-roa

d di

esel

po

wer

ed e

quip

men

t. Th

e Ca

lifor

nia

Air

Reso

urce

s Bo

ard

enfo

rces

th

e id

ling

limita

tions

. o

M

inim

ize

idlin

g tim

e ei

ther

by

shut

ting

equi

pmen

t of

f w

hen

not i

n us

e or

redu

cing

the

time

of id

ling

to 5

min

utes

[req

uire

d by

Cal

iforn

ia C

ode

of R

egul

atio

ns, T

itle

13, s

ectio

ns 2

449(

d)(3

) an

d 24

85].

Prov

ide

clea

r sig

nage

tha

t po

sts

this

requ

irem

ent

for w

orke

rs a

t the

ent

ranc

es to

the

site.

• In

spec

t an

d m

aint

ain

equi

pmen

t to

en

sure

w

ork

and

fuel

ef

ficie

ncie

s. o

M

aint

ain

all

cons

truc

tion

equi

pmen

t in

pr

oper

w

orki

ng

cond

ition

acc

ordi

ng

to

man

ufac

ture

r’s s

peci

ficat

ions

. Th

e eq

uipm

ent

mus

t be

che

cked

by

a ce

rtifi

ed m

echa

nic

and

dete

rmin

e to

be

runn

ing

in p

rope

r co

nditi

on b

efor

e it

is

oper

ated

.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.2-2

: To

red

uce

cons

truc

tion-

rela

ted

emiss

ions

, the

Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l im

plem

ent

the

follo

win

g SM

AQM

D En

hanc

ed

Emiss

ion

Cont

rol M

easu

res:

• Th

e Pr

ojec

t App

lican

t sha

ll pr

ovid

e a

plan

for

appr

oval

by

the

City

of

Elk

Gro

ve a

nd S

MAQ

MD

dem

onst

ratin

g th

at th

e he

avy-

duty

(50

Subm

ittal

of p

lan

and

inve

ntor

y pr

ior t

o is

suan

ce o

f gra

ding

per

mits

an

d/or

app

rova

l of i

mpr

ovem

ent

plan

s. A

dher

ence

to m

easu

res

thro

ugho

ut a

ll gr

adin

g an

d

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent/

Sac

ram

ento

M

etro

polit

an A

ir

127

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-5

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

ho

rsep

ower

[hp

] or

mor

e) o

ff-ro

ad v

ehic

les

to b

e us

ed i

n th

e co

nstr

uctio

n pr

ojec

t, in

clud

ing

owne

d, le

ased

, and

sub

cont

ract

or

vehi

cles

, w

ill a

chie

ve a

pro

ject

wid

e fle

et-a

vera

ge 2

0% N

OX

redu

ctio

n an

d 45

% p

artic

ulat

e re

duct

ion

com

pare

d to

the

mos

t re

cent

Ca

lifor

nia

Air

Reso

urce

s Bo

ard

(ARB

) fle

et

aver

age.

Ac

cept

able

opt

ions

for

redu

cing

em

issio

ns m

ay in

clud

e us

e of

late

m

odel

eng

ines

, lo

w-e

miss

ion

dies

el p

rodu

cts,

alte

rnat

ive

fuel

s, en

gine

ret

rofit

tech

nolo

gy, a

fter-

trea

tmen

t pro

duct

s, an

d/or

oth

er

optio

ns a

s th

ey b

ecom

e av

aila

ble.

The

SM

AQM

D’s

Cons

truc

tion

Miti

gatio

n Ca

lcul

ator

can

be

used

to

iden

tify

an e

quip

men

t fle

et

that

ach

ieve

s thi

s red

uctio

n.

• Th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l su

bmit

to t

he C

ity o

f El

k Gr

ove

and

SMAQ

MD

a co

mpr

ehen

sive

inve

ntor

y of

all

off-r

oad

cons

truc

tion

equi

pmen

t, eq

ual t

o or

gre

ater

tha

n 50

hor

sepo

wer

, tha

t w

ill b

e us

ed a

n ag

greg

ate

of 4

0 or

mor

e ho

urs

duri

ng a

ny p

ortio

n of

the

cons

truc

tion

proj

ect.

The

inve

ntor

y sh

all i

nclu

de t

he h

orse

pow

er

ratin

g, e

ngin

e m

odel

yea

r, an

d pr

ojec

ted

hour

s of

use

for

eac

h pi

ece

of e

quip

men

t. Th

e in

vent

ory

shal

l be

upda

ted

and

subm

itted

m

onth

ly t

hrou

ghou

t th

e du

ratio

n of

the

pro

ject

, exc

ept

that

an

inve

ntor

y sh

all n

ot b

e re

quir

ed fo

r an

y 30

-day

per

iod

in w

hich

no

cons

truc

tion

activ

ity o

ccur

s. At

leas

t 48

hou

rs p

rior

to

the

use

of

subj

ect

heav

y-du

ty o

ff-ro

ad e

quip

men

t, th

e pr

ojec

t re

pres

enta

tive

shal

l pr

ovid

e th

e SM

AQM

D w

ith t

he a

ntic

ipat

ed c

onst

ruct

ion

timel

ine

incl

udin

g st

art d

ate,

and

nam

e an

d ph

one

num

ber

of th

e pr

ojec

t m

anag

er a

nd o

n-si

te f

orem

an.

The

SMAQ

MD’

s M

odel

Eq

uipm

ent L

ist c

an b

e us

ed to

subm

it th

is in

form

atio

n.

• Th

e Pr

ojec

t App

lican

t sha

ll en

sure

that

em

issio

ns fr

om a

ll of

f-roa

d di

esel

pow

ered

equ

ipm

ent

used

on

the

proj

ect

site

do n

ot e

xcee

d 40

% o

paci

ty f

or m

ore

than

thr

ee m

inut

es i

n an

y on

e ho

ur. A

ny

equi

pmen

t fou

nd to

exc

eed

40 p

erce

nt o

paci

ty (o

r Rin

gelm

ann

2.0)

sh

all b

e re

pair

ed im

med

iate

ly. N

on-c

ompl

iant

equ

ipm

ent

will

be

docu

men

ted

and

a su

mm

ary

prov

ided

to

the

lead

age

ncy

and

SMAQ

MD

mon

thly

. A v

isua

l sur

vey

of a

ll in

-ope

ratio

n eq

uipm

ent

shal

l be

mad

e at

lea

st w

eekl

y, a

nd a

mon

thly

sum

mar

y of

the

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

Qu

ality

M

anag

emen

t Di

stri

ct

128

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

6 Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

vi

sual

surv

ey re

sults

shal

l be

subm

itted

thro

ugho

ut th

e du

ratio

n of

th

e pr

ojec

t, ex

cept

that

the

mon

thly

sum

mar

y sh

all n

ot b

e re

quir

ed

for a

ny 3

0-da

y pe

riod

in w

hich

no

cons

truc

tion

activ

ity o

ccur

s. Th

e m

onth

ly s

umm

ary

shal

l inc

lude

the

qua

ntity

and

typ

e of

veh

icle

s su

rvey

ed a

s wel

l as t

he d

ates

of e

ach

surv

ey. T

he S

MAQ

MD

and/

or

othe

r of

ficia

ls m

ay c

ondu

ct p

erio

dic

site

insp

ectio

ns t

o de

term

ine

com

plia

nce.

Not

hing

in

th

is se

ctio

n sh

all

supe

rsed

e ot

her

SMAQ

MD,

stat

e or

fede

ral r

ules

or r

egul

atio

ns.

• If

at t

he t

ime

of c

onst

ruct

ion,

the

SM

AQM

D ha

s ad

opte

d a

regu

latio

n ap

plic

able

to

cons

truc

tion

emiss

ions

, com

plia

nce

with

th

e re

gula

tion

may

com

plet

ely

or p

artia

lly r

epla

ce th

is m

itiga

tion.

Co

nsul

tatio

n w

ith t

he S

MAQ

MD

prio

r to

con

stru

ctio

n w

ill b

e ne

cess

ary

to m

ake

this

dete

rmin

atio

n.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-1

: Th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l co

mpl

y w

ith t

he

Term

s an

d Co

nditi

ons,

Repo

rtin

g Re

quir

emen

ts,

and

Cons

erva

tion

Reco

mm

enda

tions

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith t

he U

SFW

S In

cide

ntal

Tak

e St

atem

ent i

ssue

d fo

r the

Pro

ject

.

As sp

ecifi

ed in

the

perm

it an

d th

roug

hout

all

eart

hmov

ing

and

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-2

: W

ithin

30

days

pri

or t

o th

e st

art

of a

ny

cons

truc

tion

activ

ity,

a qu

alifi

ed b

iolo

gist

sha

ll co

nduc

t a

burr

ow

surv

ey t

o de

term

ine

if bu

rrow

ing

owls

are

pres

ent

with

in t

he P

roje

ct

site.

If bu

rrow

ing

owls

are

obse

rved

on

the

site,

mea

sure

s su

ch a

s fla

ggin

g th

e bu

rrow

and

avo

idin

g di

stur

banc

e, pa

ssiv

e re

loca

tion,

or

activ

e re

loca

tion

to m

ove

owls

from

the

site

, sha

ll be

impl

emen

ted

to

ensu

re th

at n

o ow

ls or

act

ive

burr

ows a

re in

adve

rten

tly b

urie

d du

ring

co

nstr

uctio

n. A

ll m

easu

res

shal

l be

dete

rmin

ed b

y a

qual

ified

bio

logi

st

and

appr

oved

by

the

CDFW

.

Al

l bu

rrow

ing

owl

surv

eys

shal

l be

con

duct

ed a

ccor

ding

to

CDFW

pr

otoc

ol. T

he p

roto

col r

equi

res,

at a

min

imum

, fou

r fie

ld su

rvey

s of t

he

entir

e sit

e an

d ar

eas

with

in 5

00 fe

et o

f the

site

by

wal

king

tra

nsec

ts

clos

e en

ough

that

the

entir

e sit

e is

visib

le. T

he su

rvey

shou

ld b

e at

leas

t th

ree

hour

s in

leng

th, e

ither

from

one

hou

r bef

ore

sunr

ise to

two

hour

s af

ter

or tw

o ho

urs b

efor

e su

nset

to o

ne h

our

afte

r. Su

rvey

s sha

ll no

t be

cond

ucte

d du

ring

in

clem

ent

wea

ther

, w

hen

burr

owin

g ow

ls ar

e

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

129

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-7

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

ty

pica

lly le

ss a

ctiv

e an

d vi

sibl

e.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-3

: If

Proj

ect

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

, in

clud

ing

vege

tatio

n cl

eari

ng, a

re t

o oc

cur

duri

ng t

he n

estin

g se

ason

for

bird

s pr

otec

ted

unde

r the

Cal

iforn

ia F

ish a

nd G

ame

Code

and

Mig

rato

ry B

ird

Trea

ty A

ct (

appr

oxim

atel

y M

arch

1-A

ugus

t 31

) th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l ret

ain

a qu

alifi

ed b

iolo

gist

to p

erfo

rm p

reco

nstr

uctio

n su

rvey

s for

pr

otec

ted

bird

s, in

clud

ing

nest

ing

rapt

ors,

on th

e Pr

ojec

t site

and

in th

e im

med

iate

vic

inity

. At

leas

t tw

o su

rvey

s sh

all b

e co

nduc

ted

no m

ore

than

15

days

pri

or to

the

initi

atio

n of

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es, i

nclu

ding

ve

geta

tion

clea

ring

. In

the

even

t tha

t pro

tect

ed b

irds

, inc

ludi

ng n

estin

g ra

ptor

s, ar

e fo

und

on th

e Pr

ojec

t site

, offs

ite im

prov

emen

t cor

rido

rs, o

r th

e im

med

iate

vic

inity

, the

Pro

ject

app

lican

t sha

ll:

• Lo

cate

and

map

the

loca

tion

of th

e ne

st si

te. W

ithin

2 w

orki

ng d

ays

of th

e su

rvey

s pre

pare

a re

port

and

subm

it to

the

City

and

CDF

W;

• A

no-d

istur

banc

e bu

ffer o

f 250

feet

shal

l be

esta

blish

ed;

• On

-goi

ng w

eekl

y su

rvey

s sh

all b

e co

nduc

ted

to e

nsur

e th

at t

he n

o di

stur

banc

e bu

ffer

is m

aint

aine

d. C

onst

ruct

ion

can

resu

me

whe

n a

qual

ified

bio

logi

st h

as co

nfir

med

that

the

bird

s hav

e fle

dged

.

In th

e ev

ent o

f des

truc

tion

of a

nes

t with

egg

s, or

if a

juve

nile

or

adul

t ra

ptor

sho

uld

beco

me

stra

nded

fro

m t

he n

est,

inju

red

or k

illed

, the

qu

alifi

ed b

iolo

gist

sha

ll im

med

iate

ly n

otify

the

CDF

W. T

he q

ualif

ied

biol

ogist

sha

ll co

ordi

nate

with

the

CDF

W t

o ha

ve t

he in

jure

d ra

ptor

ei

ther

tra

nsfe

rred

to

a ra

ptor

rec

over

y ce

nter

or,

in t

he c

ase

of

mor

talit

y, tr

ansf

er it

to

the

CDFW

with

in 4

8 ho

urs

of n

otifi

catio

n. I

f di

rect

ed/a

utho

rize

d by

the

CDFW

dur

ing

the

notif

icat

ion,

the

qual

ified

bi

olog

ist m

ay tr

ansf

er th

e in

jure

d ra

ptor

s to

a ra

ptor

reco

very

cent

er.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-4

: Pr

ior

to t

he c

omm

ence

men

t of

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es, t

he P

roje

ct A

pplic

ant s

hall

prov

ide

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

with

ev

iden

ce th

at th

e Pr

ojec

t is i

n co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith th

e re

quir

emen

ts o

f the

Ci

ty o

f El

k Gr

ove

Swai

nson

’s H

awk

Chap

ter

16.1

30 o

f th

e El

k Gr

ove

Mun

icip

al C

ode.

Com

plia

nce

will

req

uire

the

Pro

ject

App

lican

t to

pr

eser

ve 1

26.3

9 ac

res o

f sui

tabl

e ha

bita

t. Th

e su

itabi

lity

of th

e ha

bita

t

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

130

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

8 Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

fo

r pr

eser

vatio

n pu

rpos

es

shal

l be

de

term

ined

by

the

CDFW

in

coor

dina

tion

with

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

. The

pro

pose

d op

en s

pace

and

na

ture

pre

serv

atio

n ar

ea lo

cate

d w

ithin

the

Proj

ect s

ite m

ay b

e ut

ilize

d fo

r a p

ortio

n of

the

126.

39 a

cres

if a

ppro

ved

by th

e CD

FW.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-5

: If

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

are

pla

nned

to

begi

n du

ring

the

Swai

nson

's ha

wk

nest

ing

peri

od (M

arch

1 to

Sep

tem

ber 1

5),

a pr

econ

stru

ctio

n su

rvey

and

nes

ting

seas

on s

urve

ys f

or n

estin

g Sw

ains

on’s

haw

ks s

hall

be c

ondu

cted

thr

ough

out

area

s of

sui

tabl

e ne

stin

g ha

bita

t on

the

parc

el a

nd a

djac

ent a

reas

with

in 5

00 fe

et o

f the

Pr

ojec

t sit

e. Th

e pr

e-co

nstr

uctio

n su

rvey

s sh

all b

e co

mpl

eted

pri

or t

o th

e st

art o

f con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es. T

he n

estin

g se

ason

sur

veys

sha

ll be

co

nduc

ted

once

in A

pril

and

once

in M

ay.

If an

act

ive

Swai

nson

’s ha

wk

nest

is

obse

rved

, the

bio

logi

st s

hall

notif

y th

e Ci

ty o

f El

k Gr

ove

and

cons

ult w

ith th

e CD

FW to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

pro

ject

-rel

ated

act

iviti

es

are

likel

y to

impa

ct th

e ne

stin

g pa

ir a

nd to

det

erm

ine

the

appr

opri

ate

prot

ectio

n m

easu

res

to i

mpl

emen

t, w

hich

may

inc

lude

hal

ting

or

post

poni

ng l

and

clea

ring

and

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es u

ntil

all

youn

g ha

ve fl

edge

d an

d ad

ditio

nal n

estin

g at

tem

pts n

o lo

nger

occ

ur. I

f a n

est

tree

is fo

und

on th

e Pr

ojec

t sit

e pr

ior

to c

onst

ruct

ion

and

is pr

opos

ed

for

rem

oval

, the

n ap

prop

riat

e pe

rmits

fro

m C

DFW

sha

ll be

obt

aine

d an

d m

itiga

tion

impl

emen

ted

purs

uant

to C

DFW

gui

delin

es.

• Pr

ior

to i

ssua

nce

of b

uild

ing

or g

radi

ng p

erm

its,

the

Proj

ect

Appl

ican

t sh

all

prov

ide

Deve

lopm

ent

Serv

ices

, Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent w

ritt

en v

erifi

catio

n th

at a

qua

lifie

d bi

olog

ist h

as b

een

reta

ined

by

the

Proj

ect

Appl

ican

t to

per

form

the

pre

cons

truc

tion

surv

ey.

This

actio

n m

ay

be

wai

ved

if th

e bi

olog

ist

will

be

co

ntra

cted

by

the

City

at t

he P

roje

ct A

pplic

ant’s

exp

ense

.

• N

o ea

rlie

r th

an 3

0 da

ys b

efor

e co

mm

ence

men

t of

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es,

incl

udin

g la

nd c

lear

ing,

the

qua

lifie

d bi

olog

ist s

hall

subm

it an

d ce

rtify

to th

e Pl

anni

ng D

irec

tor

the

resu

lts o

f the

pre

-co

nstr

uctio

n su

rvey

. Fai

lure

to

subm

it th

e re

quir

ed s

urve

y re

sults

w

ill d

elay

the

appr

oval

to in

itiat

e co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es, i

nclu

ding

la

nd cl

eari

ng.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

131

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-9

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

•

No

late

r th

an A

pril

30, t

he q

ualif

ied

biol

ogist

sha

ll su

bmit

and

cert

ify t

o th

e Pl

anni

ng D

irec

tor

the

resu

lts o

f th

e 50

0-fo

ot s

ite

peri

met

er su

rvey

con

duct

ed in

Apr

il. F

ailu

re to

subm

it th

e re

quir

ed

surv

ey r

esul

ts w

ill c

ause

any

con

stru

ctio

n ac

tivity

to

be h

alte

d un

til s

uch

resu

lts a

re s

ubm

itted

and

app

rove

d by

the

Pla

nnin

g Di

rect

or. I

f no

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

hav

e ta

ken

plac

e, fa

ilure

to

subm

it th

e re

quir

ed s

urve

y re

sults

will

del

ay t

he a

ppro

val

to

initi

ate

cons

truc

tion

activ

ities

, inc

ludi

ng la

nd cl

eari

ng.

N

o la

ter t

han

May

31,

the

qual

ified

bio

logi

st sh

all s

ubm

it an

d ce

rtify

to

the

Plan

ning

Dir

ecto

r th

e re

sults

of t

he 5

00-fo

ot s

ite p

erim

eter

sur

vey

cond

ucte

d in

May

. Fai

lure

to

subm

it th

e re

quir

ed s

urve

y re

sults

will

ca

use

any

cons

truc

tion

activ

ity t

o be

hal

ted

until

suc

h re

sults

are

su

bmitt

ed a

nd a

ppro

ved

by t

he P

lann

ing

Dire

ctor

. If n

o co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es h

ave

take

n pl

ace,

failu

re to

subm

it th

e re

quir

ed su

rvey

resu

lts

will

del

ay t

he a

ppro

val

to i

nitia

te c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

, in

clud

ing

land

clea

ring

.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-6

: Up

to t

hirt

y da

ys p

rior

to

the

any

dist

urba

nce

activ

ities

, in

clud

ing

but

not

limite

d to

th

e co

mm

ence

men

t of

co

nstr

uctio

n an

d/or

rem

oval

of t

rees

on

or a

djac

ent t

o th

e Pr

ojec

t site

, th

e Pr

ojec

t App

lican

t sha

ll re

tain

a q

ualif

ied

biol

ogist

to c

ondu

ct p

re-

cons

truc

tion

bat s

urve

y(s)

of p

oten

tial d

iurn

al ro

ostin

g tr

ees (

e.g. t

rees

24

” DB

H a

nd g

reat

er, s

nags

, hol

low

tre

es).

Duri

ng t

he s

urve

y(s)

the

qu

alifi

ed b

iolo

gist

will

ins

pect

all

pote

ntia

l di

urna

l ro

ostin

g tr

ees

with

in t

he

entir

e ar

ea(s

) w

here

con

stru

ctio

n w

ill a

nd

with

in a

su

rrou

ndin

g 10

0 fo

ot-b

uffe

r ar

ea u

sing

the

appr

opri

ate

and

mos

t ef

fect

ive

met

hodo

logy

(e.g

. cam

era

insp

ectio

n, e

xit

surv

ey w

ith n

ight

op

tics,

acou

stic

sur

vey)

in

dete

rmin

ing

pres

ence

or

abse

nce

of b

at

spec

ies.

If

activ

e ro

osts

are

fou

nd, n

o co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es s

hall

take

pla

ce

with

in 2

50 f

eet

of t

he n

est

until

the

you

ng h

ave

fledg

ed. O

n-go

ing

wee

kly

surv

eys

shal

l be

cond

ucte

d to

ens

ure

that

the

no

dist

urba

nce

buffe

r is

mai

ntai

ned.

Con

stru

ctio

n ca

n re

sum

e w

hen

a qu

alifi

ed

biol

ogist

has

conf

irm

ed th

at th

e yo

ung

bats

hav

e fle

dged

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

132

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

10

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

3.3

-7.

Prio

r to

the

com

men

cem

ent

of g

radi

ng,

the

Proj

ect A

pplic

ant s

hall

coor

dina

te w

ith th

e CN

PS to

ens

ure

effo

rts

are

mad

e to

sal

vage

por

tions

of t

he h

abita

t or

plan

t pop

ulat

ions

of D

war

f do

wni

ngia

and

Leg

ener

e th

at w

ill b

e lo

st a

s a re

sult

of im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he P

roje

ct. T

his

shal

l in

clud

e re

loca

tion/

tran

spla

ntin

g th

e pl

ants

an

d/or

see

d ba

nk t

hat

wou

ld b

e af

fect

ed b

y th

e Pr

ojec

t to

are

as

prop

osed

for

wet

land

cre

atio

n or

ano

ther

app

ropr

iate

are

a fo

r ei

ther

re

-est

ablis

hmen

t afte

r con

stru

ctio

n is

com

plet

e or

for p

lant

ing.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-8

: Up

to th

irty

day

s pri

or to

any

gro

und

dist

urba

nce

activ

ities

, th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l re

tain

a q

ualif

ied

bota

nist

to

cond

uct

conf

irm

atio

n pl

ant

surv

ey(s

) fo

r Pe

ruvi

an d

odde

r, Sl

ende

r Or

cutt

gra

ss, a

nd S

anfo

rd’s

arro

whe

ad. T

hese

pla

nts

have

not

bee

n ob

serv

ed o

n th

e Pr

ojec

t sit

e th

roug

h pr

evio

us s

urve

ys;

how

ever

, ap

prop

riat

e ha

bita

t fo

r th

ese

spec

ies

is pr

esen

t. If

the

conf

irm

atio

n su

rvey

(s)

reve

al t

he p

rese

nce

of t

hese

pla

nts,

then

the

qua

lifie

d bo

tani

st s

hall

notif

y th

e Ci

ty o

f El

k Gr

ove

and

the

appr

opri

ate

regu

lato

ry a

genc

y w

ith ju

risd

ictio

n ov

er th

e pl

ant.

If th

e co

nfir

mat

ion

surv

ey(s

) rev

eal t

he p

rese

nce

of th

ese

plan

ts, m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s sha

ll be

im

plem

ente

d to

red

uce

pote

ntia

l im

pact

s to

the

ext

ent

feas

ible

. M

itiga

tion

shal

l in

clud

e re

loca

tion/

tran

spla

ntin

g th

e pl

ants

and

/or

seed

ban

k th

at w

ould

be

affe

cted

by

the

Proj

ect t

o ar

eas

prop

osed

for

wet

land

cr

eatio

n or

an

othe

r ap

prop

riat

e ar

ea

for

eith

er

re-

esta

blish

men

t af

ter

cons

truc

tion

is co

mpl

ete

or f

or p

lant

ing.

If

the

conf

irm

atio

n su

rvey

(s) d

o no

t rev

eal t

he p

rese

nce

of th

ese

plan

ts, t

hen

the

Proj

ect A

pplic

ant i

s fre

e to

mov

e fo

rwar

d w

ith g

roun

d di

stur

banc

e ac

tiviti

es,

subj

ect

to

all

perm

its

and

othe

r Pr

ojec

t m

itiga

tion

requ

irem

ents

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-9

Pri

or t

o an

y co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es, t

he P

roje

ct

Appl

ican

t sha

ll en

sure

that

the

Sect

ion

404

perm

it iss

ued

by th

e US

ACE,

Se

ctio

n 40

1 W

ater

Qua

lity

Cert

ifica

tion

issue

d by

the

RWQC

B, a

nd th

e Se

ctio

n 16

02 S

trea

mbe

d Al

tera

tion

Agre

emen

t iss

ued

by th

e CD

FW a

re

valid

and

act

ive.

If a

ny o

f the

abo

ve m

entio

ned

regu

lato

ry p

erm

its a

re

deem

ed in

valid

or

inac

tive

by t

he is

suin

g re

gula

tory

age

ncy

then

the

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

133

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-1

1

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l co

ordi

nate

with

the

reg

ulat

ory

agen

cy t

o re

ceiv

e up

date

d pe

rmits

and

app

rova

ls to

ens

ure

that

all

Proj

ect

activ

ities

are

aut

hori

zed

unde

r the

ir re

spec

tive

regu

latio

ns.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-1

0 T

he P

roje

ct A

pplic

ant

shal

l co

mpl

y w

ith t

he

requ

irem

ents

and

rec

omm

enda

tions

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith t

he S

ectio

n 40

4 Pe

rmit

issue

d by

the

USA

CE,

the

Sect

ion

401

Wat

er Q

ualit

y Ce

rtifi

catio

n iss

ued

by t

he R

WQC

B, a

nd t

he S

ectio

n 16

02 S

trea

mbe

d Al

tera

tion

Agre

emen

t iss

ued

by th

e CD

FW fo

r the

Pro

ject

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-1

1 Pr

ior

to a

ny c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

tha

t w

ould

re

sult

in t

he r

emov

al o

f a p

rote

cted

tre

e as

def

ined

by

the

City

of E

lk

Grov

e Tr

ee P

rese

rvat

ion

and

Prot

ectio

n Ch

apte

r, th

e Pr

ojec

t App

lican

t sh

all:

• De

velo

p a

deta

iled

tree

pre

serv

atio

n pl

an fo

r tre

es to

be

reta

ined

.

• Fo

r tr

ees

to b

e pr

eser

ved,

the

goa

l of p

roje

ct d

esig

n sh

ould

be

to

avoi

d gr

adin

g, c

ompa

ctio

n, t

renc

hing

, ve

hicl

e tr

affic

, m

ater

ial

stor

age

or a

ny o

ther

dist

urba

nce

in t

he p

rote

ctio

n zo

nes

of t

he

tree

s.

• Un

der t

he d

irec

t sup

ervi

sion

of a

n IS

A Ce

rtifi

ed A

rbor

ist, i

nsta

ll th

e CM

U w

all

on p

ier

foot

ings

as

oppo

sed

to a

con

tinuo

us f

ootin

g w

here

the

cons

truc

tion

of th

e pr

opos

ed C

MU

wal

l will

occ

ur w

ithin

tr

ee p

rote

ctio

n zo

nes.

A st

eel b

eam

, pla

te, o

r eq

uiva

lent

can

spa

n ov

er t

ree

root

s (F

igur

e 8.

6) s

o th

at t

he w

all “

float

s” o

ver

the

soil.

Di

g al

l pie

r loc

atio

ns b

y ha

nd to

a d

epth

of 3

feet

and

mov

e pi

ers a

s ne

cess

ary

to a

void

root

s lar

ger t

han

one

inch

in d

iam

eter

.

• Pr

ior

to c

onst

ruct

ion,

con

duct

a m

eetin

g be

twee

n th

e Ar

bori

st, a

ll co

ntra

ctor

s, su

bcon

trac

tors

, and

pro

ject

man

ager

s to

disc

uss

tree

pr

eser

vatio

n gu

idel

ines

.

• Pr

ior

to a

ny c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ity o

n sit

e, id

entif

y tr

ees

to b

e pr

eser

ved

and

inst

all t

ree

prot

ectio

n fe

ncin

g in

a c

ircl

e ce

nter

ed a

t th

e tr

ee tr

unk

with

a ra

dius

equ

al to

the

max

imum

dri

p lin

e ra

dius

or

as

far

from

the

trun

k as

pos

sible

whe

re s

truc

ture

s ar

e lo

cate

d.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

134

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

12

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

Th

is fe

nced

are

a is

defin

ed a

s the

tree

pro

tect

ion

zone

.

• Tr

ee p

rote

ctio

n fe

nces

sho

uld

be m

ade

of c

hain

lin

k w

ith p

osts

su

nk i

nto

the

grou

nd.

Thes

e fe

nces

sho

uld

not

be r

emov

ed o

r m

oved

unt

il co

nstr

uctio

n is

com

plet

e. N

o so

il or

abo

ve g

roun

d di

stur

banc

e sh

all o

ccur

with

in t

he f

ence

d ar

ea. N

o so

il, m

ater

ial

stor

age,

spo

il, w

aste

or

was

hout

wat

er s

hall

be d

epos

ited

with

in

the

fenc

ed a

reas

.

• An

y w

ork

that

is to

occ

ur w

ithin

the

prot

ectio

n zo

nes

of t

he tr

ees

shou

ld b

e m

onito

red

by th

e Co

nsul

ting

Arbo

rist

.

• If

inju

ry

shou

ld

occu

r to

an

y tr

ee

duri

ng

cons

truc

tion,

th

e Co

nsul

ting

Arbo

rist

shou

ld b

e co

nsul

ted

as so

on a

s pos

sible

so th

at

appr

opri

ate

trea

tmen

ts ca

n be

app

lied.

• An

y pr

unin

g re

quir

ed f

or c

onst

ruct

ion

or r

ecom

men

ded

in t

his

repo

rt s

houl

d be

per

form

ed b

y an

ISA

Cer

tifie

d Ar

bori

st o

r Tr

ee

Wor

ker.

• Al

l tr

ees

on t

he p

rope

rty

shou

ld b

e ir

riga

ted

ever

y ot

her

wee

k du

ring

the

spr

ing,

sum

mer

, and

fall

mon

ths

to a

dep

th o

f at

leas

t tw

o fe

et u

nder

the

tree

s’ ca

nopi

es.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.3-1

2 Pr

ior

to t

he r

emov

al o

f an

y tr

ees,

the

Proj

ect

Appl

ican

t sh

all

com

pens

ate

for

the

dire

ct l

oss

of p

rote

cted

tre

es a

s de

fined

in

the

City

of

Elk

Grov

e Tr

ee P

rese

rvat

ion

and

Prot

ectio

n Ch

apte

r at

a r

atio

of

1 in

ch p

lant

ed f

or e

very

inc

h lo

st,

or t

he

equi

vale

nt cr

edit

obta

ined

from

a tr

ee m

itiga

tion

bank

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.4-1

: W

hen

site

grad

ing

or e

arth

wor

k be

gins

, th

e ro

ute

of t

he r

edw

ood

stav

e pi

pe a

nd a

ny r

elat

ed p

ipel

ine

shal

l be

expo

sed

and

map

ped.

Th

e fe

atur

e sh

all b

e co

mpl

etel

y ph

otog

raph

ed

and

docu

men

ted

with

a fo

rm fi

led

with

the

Nor

th C

entr

al In

form

atio

n Ce

nter

.

Th

e El

k Gr

ove

Hist

oric

al S

ocie

ty s

hall

be p

rovi

ded

with

a c

opy

of t

he

phot

ogra

phs

and

docu

men

tatio

n of

the

pip

elin

e. T

he E

lk G

rove

H

istor

ical

Soc

iety

shal

l be

cons

ulte

d as

to w

heth

er it

wish

es to

obt

ain

a

As a

cond

ition

of P

roje

ct a

ppro

val

and

impl

emen

ted

duri

ng a

ll gr

ound

-di

stur

bing

act

iviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

135

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-1

3

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

pi

pe s

egm

ent f

or d

ispla

y. If

the

Elk

Gro

ve H

istor

ical

Soc

iety

iden

tifie

s th

at it

wou

ld li

ke t

o ha

ve a

seg

men

t of

the

pip

e, th

e Ap

plic

ant

shal

l de

liver

a se

gmen

t to

the

Elk

Grov

e H

istor

ical

Soc

iety

.

Fo

llow

ing

com

plet

ion

of c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ith t

he E

lk G

rove

Hist

oric

al

Soci

ety

and

docu

men

tatio

n of

the

pipe

line,

the

rem

aini

ng p

ipel

ine

may

be

rem

oved

from

the

Proj

ect s

ite.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.4-2

: If

any

cultu

ral

reso

urce

s, in

clud

ing

preh

istor

ic o

r hi

stor

ic a

rtifa

cts,

or o

ther

indi

catio

ns o

f arc

haeo

logi

cal

reso

urce

s, or

hu

man

re

mai

ns

are

foun

d du

ring

gr

adin

g an

d co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tiviti

es, a

ll w

ork

shal

l be

halte

d im

med

iate

ly w

ithin

a

200-

foot

radi

us o

f the

disc

over

y.

- If

cultu

ral r

esou

rces

are

iden

tifie

d, a

n ar

chae

olog

ist m

eetin

g th

e Se

cret

ary

of th

e In

teri

or's

Prof

essio

nal Q

ualif

icat

ions

Sta

ndar

ds in

pr

ehist

oric

or

hist

oric

al a

rcha

eolo

gy,

as a

ppro

pria

te,

shal

l be

co

nsul

ted

to e

valu

ate

the

find(

s).

Wor

k ca

nnot

con

tinue

at

the

disc

over

y sit

e un

til t

he a

rcha

eolo

gist

con

duct

s su

ffici

ent

rese

arch

an

d da

ta c

olle

ctio

n to

mak

e a

dete

rmin

atio

n th

at t

he r

esou

rce

is ei

ther

1) n

ot c

ultu

ral i

n or

igin

; or

2) n

ot p

oten

tially

sig

nific

ant o

r el

igib

le fo

r list

ing

on th

e N

RHP

or C

RHR.

-

If a

pote

ntia

lly

elig

ible

re

sour

ce

is en

coun

tere

d,

then

th

e ar

chae

olog

ist sh

all i

dent

ify m

itiga

tion

reco

mm

enda

tions

. Th

e Ci

ty

and

Proj

ect A

pplic

ant s

hall

cons

ider

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

and

the

Proj

ect

Appl

ican

t sh

all

impl

emen

t al

l m

easu

res

deem

ed f

easib

le

and

appr

opri

ate.

Su

ch

mea

sure

s m

ay

incl

ude

avoi

danc

e,

pres

erva

tion

in p

lace

, exc

avat

ion,

doc

umen

tatio

n, c

urat

ion,

dat

a re

cove

ry, a

nd o

ther

app

ropr

iate

mea

sure

s. Th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of

miti

gatio

n sh

all b

e fo

rmal

ly d

ocum

ente

d in

wri

ting

and

subm

itted

to

the

City

Pla

nnin

g De

part

men

t as v

erifi

catio

n th

at th

e pr

ovisi

ons

in C

EQA

for m

anag

ing

unan

ticip

ated

disc

over

ies h

ave

been

met

. -

If N

ativ

e Am

eric

an r

esou

rces

are

ide

ntifi

ed,

a N

ativ

e Am

eric

an

mon

itor,

follo

win

g th

e Gu

idel

ines

for

Mon

itors

/Con

sulta

nts

of

Nat

ive

Amer

ican

Cul

tura

l, Re

ligio

us, a

nd B

uria

l Site

s es

tabl

ished

by

th

e N

ativ

e Am

eric

an

Her

itage

Co

mm

issio

n,

may

al

so

be

As a

cond

ition

of P

roje

ct a

ppro

val

and

impl

emen

ted

duri

ng a

ll gr

ound

-di

stur

bing

act

iviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

136

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

14

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

re

quir

ed a

nd,

if re

quir

ed,

shal

l be

ret

aine

d at

the

App

lican

t’s

expe

nse.

-

If hu

man

re

mai

ns

are

disc

over

ed,

all

wor

k sh

all

be

halte

d im

med

iate

ly w

ithin

200

feet

of t

he d

iscov

ery,

the

Coun

ty C

oron

er

mus

t be

notif

ied,

acc

ordi

ng to

Sec

tion

5097

.98

of th

e St

ate

Publ

ic

Reso

urce

s Co

de a

nd S

ectio

n 70

50.5

of

Calif

orni

a’s

Hea

lth a

nd

Safe

ty C

ode.

If th

e re

mai

ns a

re d

eter

min

ed to

be

Nat

ive

Amer

ican

, th

e co

rone

r w

ill n

otify

the

Nat

ive

Amer

ican

Her

itage

Com

miss

ion,

an

d th

e pr

oced

ures

out

lined

in C

EQA

Sect

ion

1506

4.5(

d) a

nd (

e)

shal

l be

follo

wed

.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.5-1

: Th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l su

bmit

a N

otic

e of

In

tent

(N

OI)

and

Stor

m W

ater

Pol

lutio

n Pr

even

tion

Plan

(SW

PPP)

to

the

RWQC

B in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

NPD

ES G

ener

al C

onst

ruct

ion

Perm

it re

quir

emen

ts. T

he S

WPP

P sh

all b

e de

signe

d to

con

trol

pol

luta

nt

disc

harg

es

utili

zing

Be

st

Man

agem

ent

Prac

tices

(B

MPs

) an

d te

chno

logy

to

redu

ce e

rosio

n an

d se

dim

ents

. BM

Ps m

ay c

onsis

t of

a

wid

e va

riet

y of

mea

sure

s ta

ken

to r

educ

e po

lluta

nts

in s

torm

wat

er

runo

ff fr

om th

e Pr

ojec

t site

. Mea

sure

s sh

all i

nclu

de te

mpo

rary

ero

sion

cont

rol

mea

sure

s (s

uch

as s

ilt f

ence

s, st

aked

str

aw b

ales

/wat

tles,

silt/

sedi

men

t ba

sins

and

trap

s, ch

eck

dam

s, ge

ofab

ric,

sand

bag

dike

s, an

d te

mpo

rary

rev

eget

atio

n or

oth

er g

roun

d co

ver)

tha

t w

ill b

e em

ploy

ed t

o co

ntro

l er

osio

n fr

om d

istur

bed

area

s. Fi

nal

sele

ctio

n of

BM

Ps w

ill b

e su

bjec

t to

app

rova

l by

the

City

of

Elk

Grov

e an

d th

e RW

QCB.

The

SW

PPP

will

be

kept

on

site

duri

ng c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ity

and

will

be

mad

e av

aila

ble

upon

req

uest

to

repr

esen

tativ

es o

f th

e RW

QCB.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its.

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.5-2

: Th

e Pr

ojec

t Ap

plic

ant

shal

l pre

pare

and

sub

mit

a Po

st-C

onst

ruct

ion

Stor

mw

ater

Qua

lity

Cont

rol

Plan

in

acco

rdan

ce

with

the

mos

t rec

ent v

ersio

n of

the

Stor

mw

ater

Qua

lity

Desig

n M

anua

l fo

r th

e Sa

cram

ento

Reg

ion.

Po

st–c

onst

ruct

ion

sour

ce a

nd t

reat

men

t co

ntro

ls sh

all

be d

esig

ned

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith t

he C

ity o

f El

k Gr

ove

Impr

ovem

ent

Stan

dard

s an

d th

e St

orm

wat

er Q

ualit

y De

sign

Man

ual.

The

desig

n of

pos

t–co

nstr

uctio

n so

urce

and

trea

tmen

t con

trol

s sha

ll be

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pla

ns,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

137

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-1

5

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

su

bmitt

ed f

or a

ppro

val

with

the

im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

rega

rdle

ss o

f w

heth

er th

ey co

nstit

ute

priv

ate

or p

ublic

impr

ovem

ents

.

Dr

aina

ge f

rom

all

pave

d su

rfac

es,

incl

udin

g st

reet

s, pa

rkin

g lo

ts,

driv

eway

s, an

d ro

ofs

shal

l be

rou

ted

eith

er t

hrou

gh w

ater

qua

lity

trea

tmen

t pon

ds, s

wal

es, b

uffe

r st

rips

, or

sand

filte

rs o

r tr

eate

d w

ith a

fil

teri

ng s

yste

m p

rior

to

disc

harg

e of

f-site

to

the

stor

m d

rain

sys

tem

. La

ndsc

apin

g sh

all b

e de

signe

d to

effe

ct so

me

trea

tmen

t, al

ong

with

the

use

of a

Sto

rmw

ater

Man

agem

ent

filte

r to

per

man

ently

seq

uest

er

hydr

ocar

bons

, if

nece

ssar

y. Pe

rmea

ble

pave

rs a

nd p

avem

ent

shal

l be

utili

zed

to co

nstr

uct t

he fa

cilit

ies,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

A

sepa

rate

m

aint

enan

ce

man

ual

desc

ribi

ng

prop

er

mai

nten

ance

pr

actic

es fo

r the

spec

ific

trea

tmen

t con

trol

s to

be co

nstr

ucte

d sh

all a

lso

be s

ubm

itted

. If

the

mai

nten

ance

man

ual n

eeds

rev

ision

s, Ap

plic

ant

shal

l mak

e th

e re

ques

ted

revi

sions

in a

tim

ely

man

ner.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.5-3

: A

cert

ified

ge

otec

hnic

al

engi

neer

sh

all

be

reta

ined

to

perf

orm

a g

eote

chni

cal

engi

neer

ing

eval

uatio

n of

the

gr

adin

g an

d fo

unda

tion

plan

s fo

r th

e Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge P

roje

ct. T

he

geot

echn

ical

rep

ort

shal

l id

entif

y m

easu

res

as n

eces

sary

to

addr

ess

bear

ing

capa

city

, liq

uefa

ctio

n, la

tera

l spr

eadi

ng, e

xpan

sive

soi

ls, a

nd

subs

iden

ce,

and

to e

nsur

e st

able

soi

l co

nditi

ons.

The

gra

ding

and

im

prov

emen

t pl

ans,

as w

ell a

s th

e bu

ildin

g pl

ans

shal

l be

desig

ned

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith t

he r

ecom

men

datio

ns p

rovi

ded

in t

he g

eote

chni

cal

eval

uatio

n. T

he P

roje

ct A

pplic

ant s

hall

adhe

re to

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

pr

ovid

ed in

the

geot

echn

ical

eng

inee

ring

repo

rt.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

and/

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pl

ans,

whi

chev

er o

ccur

s fir

st

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.5-4

: If a

sept

ic sy

stem

is p

lann

ed fo

r ins

talla

tion

at th

e 5.

5-ac

re p

ark

site,

the

abili

ty o

f th

e so

ils t

o ac

com

mod

ate

a se

ptic

sy

stem

sha

ll be

eva

luat

ed b

y a

licen

sed

engi

neer

. If

the

soils

do

not

have

the

cap

acity

to

adeq

uate

ly p

erco

late

and

abs

orb

sept

ic t

ank

was

te, a

ny re

stro

om fa

cilit

ies o

n th

e pa

rk si

te sh

all b

e co

nnec

ted

to th

e pu

blic

sew

er sy

stem

or r

estr

oom

faci

litie

s sha

ll be

pro

hibi

ted.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

and/

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pl

ans f

or th

e pa

rk si

te, w

hich

ever

oc

curs

firs

t

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

138

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

16

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

3.6

-1:

Prio

r to

the

iss

uanc

e of

bui

ldin

g pe

rmits

, the

Pr

ojec

t sh

all

dem

onst

rate

com

plia

nce

with

the

Clim

ate

Actio

n Pl

an,

incl

udin

g, b

ut n

ot li

mite

d to

, man

dato

ry m

easu

res

BE-6

, BE-

10, R

C-1,

RC

-2, T

ACM

-5, a

nd T

ACM

-12.

The

Proj

ect

Appl

ican

t sh

all

cons

ider

in

corp

orat

ing

addi

tiona

l re

com

men

ded

GHG

Redu

ctio

n M

easu

res.

The

Pro

ject

App

lican

t sh

all

prov

ide

reas

ons/

just

ifica

tion,

in t

he f

orm

of

a w

ritt

en le

tter

, for

any

re

com

men

ded

GHG

Redu

ctio

n M

easu

res (

BE-7

and

BE-

9),

that

are

not

in

corp

orat

ed i

nto

the

Proj

ect.

This

does

not

app

ly t

o th

e m

anda

tory

m

easu

res,

whi

ch m

ust b

e in

corp

orat

ed.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of b

uild

ing

perm

its

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.7-1

: All

aban

done

d w

ells

on t

he P

roje

ct s

ite s

hall

be

dest

roye

d in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

req

uire

men

ts o

f th

e Sa

cram

ento

Co

unty

Env

iron

men

tal H

ealth

Div

ision

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

and/

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.7-2

: If

at a

ny t

ime

duri

ng c

onst

ruct

ion

an e

xist

ing

sept

ic

syst

em

is en

coun

tere

d,

the

syst

em

shal

l be

re

mov

ed

and

dest

roye

d in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

req

uire

men

ts o

f th

e Sa

cram

ento

Co

unty

Env

iron

men

tal H

ealth

Div

ision

.

As a

cond

ition

of P

roje

ct a

ppro

val

and

impl

emen

ted

duri

ng a

ll gr

ound

-di

stur

bing

act

iviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.7-3

: If a

t any

tim

e du

ring

con

stru

ctio

n, s

oil s

tain

ing,

so

il od

ors,

or p

oten

tially

haz

ardo

us n

on-s

oil a

rtifa

cts a

re e

ncou

nter

ed,

the

Appl

ican

t sh

all c

ease

con

stru

ctio

n in

the

vic

inity

of t

he d

iscov

ery.

Th

e Ap

plic

ant s

hall

have

a li

cens

ed g

eote

chni

cal e

ngin

eer

eval

uate

the

soil

cond

ition

s an

d, i

f po

tent

ially

haz

ardo

us c

ondi

tions

exi

st, s

ubm

it re

com

men

datio

ns to

the

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pub

lic W

orks

Dep

artm

ent t

o ad

dres

s po

tent

ially

ha

zard

ous

cond

ition

s.

Upon

ac

cept

ance

of

re

com

men

datio

ns

by

the

City

, th

e Ap

plic

ant

shal

l im

plem

ent

reco

mm

enda

tions

.

As a

cond

ition

of P

roje

ct a

ppro

val

and

impl

emen

ted

duri

ng a

ll gr

ound

-di

stur

bing

act

iviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.8-1

: Pr

ior

to a

ppro

val o

f gra

ding

and

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s for

the

lots

in V

illag

e 1-

A th

at a

re se

rved

by

the

Bond

Roa

d Tr

unk

Drai

nage

Sys

tem

, the

Pro

ject

App

lican

t sh

all e

nter

into

an

agre

emen

t w

ith th

e Ci

ty to

fund

the

fair

-sha

re c

ost f

or th

e in

crem

enta

l inc

reas

e in

th

e Bo

nd R

oad

Trun

k Dr

aina

ge s

yste

m t

hat

need

ed t

o ac

com

mod

ate

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of g

radi

ng p

erm

its

and/

or a

ppro

val o

f im

prov

emen

t pl

ans f

or th

e lo

ts in

Vill

age

1-A

that

ar

e se

rved

by

the

Bond

Roa

d Tr

unk

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pu

blic

Wor

ks

Depa

rtm

ent

139

EXEC

UTI

VE S

UM

MAR

Y ES

Draf

t Env

iron

men

tal I

mpa

ct R

epor

t –Si

lver

ado

Villa

ge

ES-1

7

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

th

e Pr

ojec

t. T

he in

crem

enta

l inc

reas

e sh

all b

e ca

lcul

ated

bas

ed o

n an

y ad

ditio

nal a

mou

nt a

bove

the

prev

ious

ly id

entif

ied

upsiz

ing

requ

ired

for

the

Bond

Roa

d Tr

unk

Drai

nage

Sys

tem

in t

he C

ity’s

Mas

ter

Drai

nage

Pl

an.

The

agre

emen

t sha

ll id

entif

y th

e tim

ing

for

the

drai

nage

sys

tem

im

prov

emen

ts a

nd s

hall

requ

ire

that

no

build

ing

perm

its b

e iss

ued

for

the

Lots

in

Villa

ge 1

-A t

hat

are

serv

ed b

y th

e Bo

nd R

oad

Trun

k Dr

aina

ge S

yste

m I

mpr

ovem

ents

unt

il su

ch i

mpr

ovem

ents

hav

e be

en

com

plet

ed.

Drai

nage

Sys

tem

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.10-

1:

Dev

elop

men

t pl

ans

for

the

Proj

ect

shal

l in

clud

e th

e fo

llow

ing

noise

att

enua

tion

feat

ures

:

• A

unifo

rm 7

-foot

tal

l noi

se b

arri

er s

houl

d be

con

stru

cted

alo

ng

the

sout

h pr

oper

ty li

nes o

f all

prop

osed

resid

entia

l use

s adj

acen

t to

Bond

Roa

d to

redu

ce fu

ture

traf

fic n

oise

leve

ls to

60

dB L

dn o

r les

s w

ithin

pro

pose

d ba

ckya

rds.

The

barr

ier

shal

l ha

ve a

n ea

rthe

n be

rm b

ase

and

the

uppe

r po

rtio

n sh

all

be c

onst

ruct

ed o

f so

lid

mat

eria

ls, s

uch

as a

mas

onry

wal

l and

sha

ll w

rap

at t

he e

nds

as

indi

cate

d in

the

Pro

ject

Dra

ft EI

R Fi

gure

3.1

0-1.

La

ndsc

apin

g,

such

as

dens

e he

dges

or

bush

es, s

hall

be p

lant

ed i

n fr

ont

of t

he

soun

dwal

l to

min

imiz

e un

brok

en v

iew

s of

the

sou

ndw

all.

A

unifo

rm 6

-foot

tal

l no

ise b

arri

er s

hall

be c

onst

ruct

ed a

long

the

ea

ster

n pr

oper

ty li

nes

of W

ater

man

Roa

d to

red

uce

futu

re t

raffi

c no

ise l

evel

s to

60

dB L

dn o

r le

ss a

t pr

opos

ed b

acky

ard

area

s lo

cate

d ad

jace

nt to

that

road

way

. The

bar

rier

shal

l be

cons

truc

ted

of s

olid

mat

eria

ls, s

uch

as a

mas

onry

wal

l, ea

rthe

n be

rm,

or

com

bina

tion

of th

e tw

o, a

nd sh

all w

rap

at th

e en

ds a

s ind

icat

ed in

Fi

gure

3.1

0-1.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of b

uild

ing

perm

its

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.10-

2:

Dev

elop

men

t pl

ans

for

the

Proj

ect

shal

l in

clud

e th

e fo

llow

ing

noise

att

enua

tion

feat

ures

:

• Ai

r co

nditi

onin

g sh

all b

e in

clud

ed in

all

resid

ence

s con

stru

cted

in

the

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

dev

elop

men

t to

allo

w o

ccup

ants

to

clos

e do

ors

and

win

dow

s as

des

ired

to

achi

eve

addi

tiona

l ac

oust

ic

isola

tion

from

traf

fic n

oise

in th

e pr

ojec

t vic

inity

.

Prio

r to

issu

ance

of b

uild

ing

perm

its

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

140

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

ORI

NG

AND

REP

ORT

ING

PRO

GRAM

18

Silv

erad

o Vi

llage

MIT

IGAT

ION

MEA

SURE

TI

MIN

G/IM

PLEM

ENTA

TION

EN

FORC

EMEN

T/

MON

ITOR

ING

VERI

FICA

TION

OF

COM

PLIA

NCE

All s

econ

d flo

or w

indo

ws

with

in 1

62 f

eet

of B

ond

Road

sha

ll ha

ve a

m

inim

um S

TC ra

ting

of 3

0.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re 3

.10-

3:

The

follo

win

g m

easu

res s

hall

be fo

llow

ed

thro

ugho

ut a

ll ph

ases

of

cons

truc

tion

that

are

with

in 2

50 f

eet

of

exist

ing

resi

denc

es:

Cons

truc

tion

equi

pmen

t sh

all

be

wel

l m

aint

aine

d an

d us

ed

judi

ciou

sly

to

be

as

quie

t as

pr

actic

al.

Equi

p al

l in

tern

al

com

bust

ion

engi

ne-d

rive

n eq

uipm

ent

with

muf

flers

, whi

ch a

re in

go

od co

nditi

on a

nd a

ppro

pria

te fo

r the

equ

ipm

ent.

Use

"qui

et"

mod

els

of a

ir c

ompr

esso

rs a

nd o

ther

sta

tiona

ry n

oise

so

urce

s whe

re te

chno

logy

exi

sts.

Loca

te s

tatio

nary

noi

se-g

ener

atin

g eq

uipm

ent

and

cons

truc

tion

stag

ing

area

s a

min

imum

of

100

feet

fro

m s

ensit

ive

rece

ptor

s, in

clud

ing

neig

hbor

ing

resid

entia

l us

es, w

hen

sens

itive

rec

epto

rs

adjo

in o

r are

nea

r a co

nstr

uctio

n ar

ea.

• Co

nstr

uctio

n ac

tivity

with

in 1

50 fe

et o

f res

iden

tial u

ses

shal

l be

lim

ited

to th

e ho

urs o

f 7 a

.m. t

o 7

p.m

. whe

neve

r suc

h ac

tivity

is

adja

cent

to re

siden

tial u

ses.

Lim

it id

ling

of i

nter

nal

com

bust

ion

engi

nes

to n

o m

ore

than

5

min

utes

.

Thro

ugho

ut a

ll co

nstr

uctio

n an

d ea

rthm

ovin

g ac

tiviti

es

City

of E

lk G

rove

Pl

anni

ng

Depa

rtm

ent

141

TASK ENGINEERING, INC.4940 TOMMAR DR.,

FAIR OAKS CALIFORINIA 95628

December 29,2012

City of Elk Grove City Council% Christopher JordanDevelopment Services - Planning8401 Laguna Palms WayElk Grove, CA 95758

Re: Silverado Village

Dear City Council Members:

We have been requested to address the following issues by Mr. Gyan Kalwani, owner of the 40

acres (APN: 127-A0fi-056-0000) located adjacent to the Northwest corner of a project entitled"silverado Village" (a tentative subdivision map) currently being reviewed by the City:

o Access to adjacent property for future use

. Multi Recreation Trail trailhead parking

Mr. Kalwani's 40 acre parcel needs access for proper future traffic flow, which requires subjectproject to redesign Court "C" to assure the future traffic flow of approximately 20 lots thatzoning allows on Mr. Kalwani's 40 acres.

It is also noted that the multi recreation trail, which is also scheduled to enter Mr. Kalwani'sproperty at the same location as Court "C"o needs to have the staging and parking requirements

addressed. The Silverado Village project should be required to provide adequate trail head offroad loading, staging, and parking at the Waterman Road end (start) of the trail. It would not be

good for the neighbors that live along Roads "A" and "C" to have the trail and park users park

directly along the road frontage.

If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call our office at (916) 878-8004 or emailat [email protected].

Sincerely,

I .:/;' '7

i' -zr^-" ,-J < /- ('.( . ,,/ L.ze-^n

Terry A. Rose, PEPresidentTASK Engineering,Inc.

Attachment: Exhibits "A" Tentative Subdivision Map "silverado Village".

Page L of1

142

skyles

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 5

skyles

Typewritten Text

Development Services - Planning 8401 Laguna Palms Way • Elk Grove, California 95758

Tel: 916.478.2265 • Fax: 916.691.3175 • www.elkgrovecity.org

City of Elk Grove Planning Commission Notice of Public Hearing

Dated: February 7, 2014 NOTICE is hereby given that on February 20, 2014, at 6:30pm, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Planning Commission of the City of Elk Grove will hold a Public Hearing at the Elk Grove City Hall, located at 8400 Laguna Palms Way, Elk Grove, to consider the following application. SILVERADO VILLAGE (EG-11-046) – SPECIAL PLANNING AREA, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The Project proposes development of a 230-acre residential community located north of Bond Road and west of Waterman Road. The Project would rezone the site from the existing zoning of RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, and Open Space to Silverado Village Special Planning Area, which includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. The Project would develop 660 single family units and up to 125 independent/assisted living/memory care units. Additionally, the Project includes:

• A 64.5-acre wetland habitat preserve area and a 6.5-acre open space parcel, providing a total of 71 acres of open space in the northern portion of the property.

• A15.7-acre open space area that will provide storage for the 100-year storm event, improve flood protection and water quality for urban runoff, and provide a buffer between Villages 1 and 2.

• Up to 6.1 acres of parkland. • A public trail system. • Street and utility improvements to serve the proposed uses.

To facilitate the proposed Project, the Applicant is also seeking a Development Agreement for the Project. The Development Agreement would limit development of the site to the Project as described above. APPLICANT: Silverado Homes dba Vintara Holdings, LLC c/o R. Brian Spilman (Representative) 3300 Douglas Blvd. Suite 390 Roseville, CA 95661

OWNER: Sacramento Area Sewer District c/o Dan Wukmir (Representative) 3711 Branch Center Road Sacramento, CA 95827

AGENT: Wood Rodgers Inc. c/o Matt Spokely, PE (Representative) 3301 C Street, Suite 100-B Sacramento, CA 95816

LOCATION/APN: Northwest corner of Bond Road and Waterman Road APN’s127-0010-002, 017, 040, 104, 105, & 106

EXISTING ZONING: RD-2, RD-4, RD-5, RD- 5(F), and O ENVIRONMENTAL: An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this Project. PROJECT PLANNER: Christopher Jordan, AICP, (916) 478-2222

NOTICE REGARDING APPEALS

Pursuant to §23.14.060 of the Zoning Code, appeals of a final action by the Planning Director must be filed with the City Clerk no later than ten (10) calendar days after the day on which the final action was taken, along with the appropriate fee.

NOTICE REGARDING CHALLENGES TO DECISIONS Pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation, California Government Code Section 65009 and/or California Public Resources Code Section 21177, if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, this public hearing. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please call (916) 478-3620. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. For more information: Planning Commission Secretary (916) 478-3620 or [email protected]

143

mailto:[email protected]

SILVERADO VILLAGE 11-046APN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIPCODE127-0410-076-0000 9210 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-045-0000 9455 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-082-0000 5 ROAN PL WOODSIDE CA 94062127-0990-013-0000 9263 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-048-0000 9016 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-037-0000 8889 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-005-0000 9017 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-022-0000 8965 QUAIL LEAF CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-012-0000 9262 DAIRY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-013-0000 9239 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-023-0000 9284 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-032-0000 9061 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-041-0000 9068 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-064-0000 2325 E KATHERINE AVE FOWLER CA 93625127-0990-009-0000 9274 DAIRY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-077-0000 9254 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-018-0000 9193 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-009-0000 9000 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-004-0000 8861 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-017-0000 8960 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-004-0000 8963 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-019-0000 9156 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-009-0000 9232 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-063-0000 9247 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-106-0000 9008 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-021-0000 9840 CORTE DORADO CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-047-0000 9230 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-034-0000 9073 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-004-0000 9180 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-010-0000 9129 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-054-0000 9436 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-009-0000 9089 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-011-0000 8777 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-062-0000 9216 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-045-0000 9215 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-002-0000 9479 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-025-0000 9258 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-024-0000 511 CARTHAGE CT ROSEVILLE CA 95746127-0500-008-0000 9167 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-039-0000 9282 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-007-0000 9031 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-029-0000 9425 VIRIDIAN WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-059-0000 9110 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-001-0000 9475 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-068-0000 9222 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-035-0000 9215 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-031-0000 9316 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-012-0000 9116 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-038-0000 9080 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-021-0000 8771 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-020-0000 8850 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-040-0000 9072 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-011-0000 9266 DAIRY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-011-0000 9240 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-005-0000 8710 CHAMBRAY RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-062-0000 8981 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-006-0000 9139 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-025-0000 8829 ROYAL VIEW CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-058-0000 9232 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0250-023-0000 9286 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-006-0000 9419 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-005-0000 9477 MARIS LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-047-0000 9163 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624

144

121-0240-014-0000 8786 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-012-0000 9233 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-025-0000 9296 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-079-0000 9355 MISTY SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-018-0000 9162 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-040-0000 9109 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-043-0000 9355 SAVIN PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-046-0000 9048 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-001-0000 9240 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-015-0000 9266 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-043-0000 9463 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-039-0000 9103 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-040-0000 9266 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-028-0000 9232 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-029-0000 9043 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-012-0000 15027 221ST DR SE MONROE WA 98272127-0480-063-0000 9322 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-063-0000 PO BOX 694 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0400-011-0000 9229 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-082-0000 9211 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-052-0000 9201 LOUIS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-070-0000 9323 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-039-0000 9324 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-019-0000 9135 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-054-0000 3203 FALLS CREEK DR SAN JOSE CA 95135127-0980-094-0000 9072 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-108-0000 9540 S COAST LN ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0950-045-0000 9222 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-003-0000 9430 MARIS LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-058-0000 9268 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-032-0000 9105 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0180-012-0000 PO BOX 1 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0520-005-0000 9141 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-011-0000 9040 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-007-0000 9016 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-009-0000 9192 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-096-0000 9064 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-032-0000 9223 RUSHING CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-016-0000 209 MAUREEN CIR BAY POINT CA 94565127-0980-016-0000 9061 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-010-0000 2244 N QUINCE WAY UPLAND CA 91784127-0510-020-0000 9151 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-072-0000 9205 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-027-0000 3286 TREBOL LN SAN JOSE CA 95148127-0620-016-0000 9084 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-056-0000 9355 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-010-0000 9175 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-057-0000 7950 E TARMA ST LONG BEACH CA 90808127-0480-087-0000 9250 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-029-0000 9060 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-083-0000 9266 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-018-0000 9136 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-030-0000 9260 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-078-0000 9257 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-050-0000 4619 RINGNECK CT SACRAMENTO CA 95842121-0250-022-0000 2893 SUNRISE BLVD STE 106 RANCHO CORDOVA CA 95742127-0420-018-0000 9254 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-053-0000 9207 LOUIS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-086-0000 9227 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-018-0000 507 KINGSBRIDGE CT SAN RAMON CA 94583127-0980-073-0000 9270 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-038-0000 9125 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-005-0000 9201 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-018-0000 8964 FITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-121-0000 9004 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624

145

127-0400-031-0000 45783 CHEYENNE PL FREMONT CA 94539127-0400-013-0000 9237 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-025-0000 9009 MORGANFIELD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-003-0000 8843 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-035-0000 8888 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-116-0000 8968 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-018-0000 8891 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-014-0000 9120 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-003-0000 8965 COVEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-059-0000 1089 KARRATTI LN APT 2 HONOLULU HI 96822127-0400-048-0000 9174 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-019-0000 9145 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-015-0000 9055 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-056-0000 9444 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-001-0000 9121 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-057-0000 9118 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-023-0000 9211 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-027-0000 9068 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-033-0000 9223 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-010-0000 9411 SKYDOME CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-049-0000 9218 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-023-0000 9072 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-051-0000 8820 ELK GROVE BLVD 3 ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0160-058-0000 9850 GOETHE RD SACRAMENTO CA 95827127-0160-060-0000 9660 ECOLOGY LN FL 2ND SACRAMENTO CA 95827127-0990-046-0000 9024 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-122-0000 9000 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-058-0000 8965 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-004-0000 9212 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-028-0000 9199 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-031-0000 8891 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-008-0000 9059 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-010-0000 9069 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-006-0000 9213 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-006-0000 9210 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-025-0000 9311 TRENARY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-015-0000 8843 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-025-0000 9064 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-034-0000 9246 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-025-0000 9109 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-090-0000 9051 ALLENFORD PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-022-0000 9246 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-024-0000 9259 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-073-0000 9201 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-019-0000 1281 LAWRENCE STATION RD APT 278 SUNNYVALE CA 94089127-0230-014-0000 8829 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-118-0000 8927 BRONSON DR GRANITE BAY CA 95746127-0470-011-0000 9125 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-114-0000 8976 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-032-0000 9351 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-028-0000 24281 RIDGECREEK LN HAYWARD CA 94541127-0950-026-0000 9825 SILVERGATE LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-013-0000 1313 WESTERN AVE CEDAR FALLS IA 50613127-0510-015-0000 9140 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-104-0000 9011 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-012-0000 8261 GARIBALDI AVE SAN GABRIEL CA 91775127-0510-032-0000 9027 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-030-0000 9320 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-074-0000 9266 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-054-0000 9029 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-002-0000 9138 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-022-0000 8757 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-025-0000 9214 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-011-0000 9231 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-044-0000 9232 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624

146

127-0990-027-0000 9293 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-048-0000 9114 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-057-0000 9201 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-009-0000 PO BOX 292340 SACRAMENTO CA 95828127-0010-046-0000 14712 GUADALUPE DR RANCHO MURIETA CA 95683127-0520-051-0000 9020 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-011-0000 9001 POPLAR HOLLOW WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-003-0000 9534 BRADSHAW RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-018-0000 9235 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-035-0000 3944 OTTOMEYER CT NORTH HIGHLANDS CA 95660127-0990-043-0000 9036 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-090-0000 9243 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-001-0000 9081 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-004-0000 9173 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-057-0000 9359 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-027-0000 9224 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-030-0000 9235 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-003-0000 9201 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-026-0000 8964 QUAIL LEAF CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-008-0000 9137 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-004-0000 9411 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-031-0000 9019 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-049-0000 9015 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-053-0000 9222 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-013-0000 9325 COLLISTON DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-023-0000 9255 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-033-0000 9035 CAMDEN LAKE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-019-0000 8799 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-004-0000 9254 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-043-0000 9228 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-004-0000 9001 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-012-0000 9045 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-088-0000 9041 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-019-0000 9089 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-046-0000 9159 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-055-0000 9044 ALLENFORD PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-010-0000 9223 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-049-0000 9028 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-055-0000 9230 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-066-0000 9310 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-029-0000 9324 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-048-0000 9441 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-054-0000 9350 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-013-0000 9155 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-019-0000 9212 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-071-0000 9209 FAXON PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-036-0000 PO BOX 254844 SACRAMENTO CA 95864127-0500-048-0000 9040 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-056-0000 9040 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-007-0000 9215 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-054-0000 9048 ALLENFORD PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-024-0000 9236 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-042-0000 9224 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-011-0000 9179 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-001-0000 2506 FALLING LEAF AVE ROSEMEAD CA 91770127-0980-079-0000 9246 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-027-0000 9193 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-020-0000 9077 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-045-0000 9052 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-036-0000 9235 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-008-0000 9228 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-002-0000 9204 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-021-0000 9040 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-048-0000 9222 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-028-0000 9064 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624

147

127-0510-018-0000 9139 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-011-0000 8828 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-034-0000 538 38TH AVE 2 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121127-0990-020-0000 9316 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-031-0000 9231 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-002-0000 9188 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-007-0000 9217 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-002-0000 9011 ELK GROVE FLORIN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-077-0000 2443 FAIR OAKS BLVD STE 368 SACRAMENTO CA 95825127-0470-024-0000 9510 ELK GROVE-FLORIN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-008-0000 940 EMMETT AVE STE 200 BELMONT CA 94002127-0520-037-0000 9121 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-014-0000 9053 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-020-0000 9265 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-037-0000 9239 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-039-0000 9052 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-030-0000 8875 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-021-0000 8840 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-015-0000 9090 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-020-0000 9251 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-113-0000 8980 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-080-0000 9278 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-031-0000 9101 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-102-0000 9003 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-009-0000 9083 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-026-0000 9254 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-008-0000 9131 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-022-0000 9163 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-045-0000 9155 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-003-0000 9255 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-058-0000 9452 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-119-0000 9012 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-006-0000 9207 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-017-0000 9258 ELLERY PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-007-0000 20 LIGHT SKY CT SACRAMENTO CA 95828127-0980-047-0000 9226 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-041-0000 9115 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-039-0000 9170 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-001-0000 PO BOX 1792 ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0980-069-0000 9271 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-061-0000 9257 ELK GROVE BLVD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-044-0000 9179 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-044-0000 9459 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-067-0000 9311 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-001-0000 9399 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-027-0000 9204 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-061-0000 118 MALACHITE HERCULES CA 94547127-0140-040-0000 9026 ACORN RIDGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95758121-0250-025-0000 9258 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-034-0000 9431 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-022-0000 9273 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-020-0000 9270 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-042-0000 9246 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-040-0000 9066 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-077-0000 9214 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-048-0000 9249 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-039-0000 9070 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-009-0000 9171 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-020-0000 8785 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-026-0000 9013 MORGANFIELD PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-016-0000 9262 ELLERY PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-026-0000 8811 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-021-0000 9127 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-033-0000 9223 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-010-0000 9128 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624

148

127-0370-044-0000 PO BOX 271 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0510-006-0000 901 H ST 103 SACRAMENTO CA 95814127-0230-003-0000 8843 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0250-024-0000 9272 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-025-0000 9275 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-027-0000 9250 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-037-0000 9084 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-016-0000 PO BOX 1401 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0500-047-0000 9044 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-013-0000 9248 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-022-0000 9211 RUSHING CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-011-0000 9041 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-054-0000 9491 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-034-0000 9107 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-017-0000 8960 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-043-0000 9060 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-025-0000 9232 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-004-0000 9013 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-088-0000 9235 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-050-0000 9214 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-057-0000 9120 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-065-0000 9204 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-006-0000 9132 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-013-0000 8809 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-016-0000 9167 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-058-0000 9315 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-030-0000 9230 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-024-0000 9020 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-016-0000 8861 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-049-0000 9237 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-052-0000 9358 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-029-0000 7806 RIVER OTTER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0480-068-0000 9315 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-037-0000 9227 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-012-0000 9235 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-006-0000 9282 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-021-0000 9223 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-032-0000 9238 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-033-0000 306 LIVE OAK DR DANVILLE CA 94506127-0980-029-0000 9216 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-019-0000 10146 LIVE OAK AVE TEMPLE CITY CA 91780127-0790-066-0000 10005 RHONE RIVER DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-020-0000 8880 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-009-0000 9033 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-033-0000 9317 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-034-0000 9069 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-009-0000 9236 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-022-0000 8824 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-043-0000 9242 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-030-0000 1821 WALES DR WALNUT CREEK CA 94595127-0430-035-0000 9435 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-005-0000 156 ORANGE BLOSSOM CIR FOLSOM CA 95630127-0620-023-0000 8973 QUAIL LEAF CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-044-0000 9351 SAVIN PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-050-0000 9182 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-002-0000 8778 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-001-0000 8794 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-005-0000 9255 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-002-0000 9403 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-123-0000 8501 N SCOTTSDALE RD STE 165 PARADISE VALLEY AZ 85253127-0490-015-0000 9247 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-024-0000 9175 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-030-0000 9056 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-031-0000 9309 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-017-0000 9136 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624

149

127-0620-011-0000 9122 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-080-0000 9242 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-032-0000 8528 BLACKBERRY WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-019-0000 9050 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-052-0000 9216 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-037-0000 9278 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-032-0000 42 HOMME WAY MILPITAS CA 95035127-0020-010-0000 8643 MARANELLO WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-027-0000 9319 TRENARY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-005-0000 8968 COVEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-011-0000 8747 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-027-0000 9069 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-010-0000 9218 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-015-0000 9201 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-037-0000 7559 CHATSWORTH CIR ELK GROVE CA 95757127-0020-015-0000 8992 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-002-0000 9005 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-028-0000 9328 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-042-0000 9040 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-004-0000 8861 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-057-0000 9223 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-011-0000 9212 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-019-0000 8890 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-007-0000 9279 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-050-0000 9111 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-011-0000 9079 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-008-0000 8876 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-007-0000 9025 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-018-0000 9208 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-005-0000 9143 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-056-0000 9225 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-005-0000 9415 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-036-0000 8883 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-060-0000 9224 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-012-0000 8810 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-029-0000 9077 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-059-0000 8854 CHEX CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-010-0000 8842 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-005-0000 9181 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-031-0000 9234 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-042-0000 9210 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-025-0000 9201 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-003-0000 9208 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-055-0000 9146 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-038-0000 9097 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-051-0000 9186 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-055-0000 9440 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-026-0000 8845 ROYAL VIEW CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-014-0000 9318 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-041-0000 8875 ROYAL VIEW CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-061-0000 9220 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-099-0000 8941 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-037-0000 PO BOX 2226 ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-020-0000 9124 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-039-0000 9076 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-002-0000 9345 COLLISTON DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-025-0000 9044 DELEON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-021-0000 9157 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-008-0000 8874 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-105-0000 9012 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-062-0000 9201 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-005-0000 9176 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-015-0000 9057 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-015-0000 9163 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-107-0000 9004 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624

150

127-0410-070-0000 9213 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-041-0000 30821 STEEPLECHASE DR SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675127-0500-035-0000 9092 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-035-0000 9235 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-030-0000 9305 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-017-0000 9132 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-060-0000 2220 DEER OAKS DR RESCUE CA 95672127-0410-014-0000 9159 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-002-0000 9022 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-013-0000 9211 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-053-0000 9123 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-035-0000 9231 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-042-0000 9359 SAVIN PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-026-0000 9315 TRENARY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-085-0000 9258 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-018-0000 9069 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-006-0000 8891 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-016-0000 8961 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-008-0000 9215 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-036-0000 9282 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-015-0000 9144 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-004-0000 1035 LUZ DEL SOL LOOP MILPITAS CA 95035127-0370-049-0000 9110 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-045-0000 9455 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-059-0000 9213 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-109-0000 8996 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-021-0000 9247 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-039-0000 9247 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-021-0000 9248 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-051-0000 9362 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-004-0000 9147 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-028-0000 9035 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-009-0000 9223 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-060-0000 301 PARNASSUS AVE APT 302 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94117127-0990-002-0000 9252 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-012-0000 8816 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-003-0000 9101 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-070-0000 9275 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-020-0000 9131 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-027-0000 8855 ROYAL VIEW CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-009-0000 9168 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-078-0000 9218 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-001-0000 9349 COLLISTON DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-064-0000 8628 BANFF VISTA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-021-0000 9120 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-001-0000 9130 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-026-0000 9187 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-018-0000 9072 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-047-0000 1389 HADDINGTON DR FOLSOM CA 95630127-0980-081-0000 9238 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-063-0000 611 ORANGE DR VACAVILLE CA 95687127-0980-066-0000 9259 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-058-0000 9227 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-020-0000 9205 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-037-0000 9091 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-017-0000 9325 FEATHER FALLS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-032-0000 8890 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-021-0000 9307 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-026-0000 9292 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-066-0000 9214 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-007-0000 9055 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-017-0000 8875 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-056-0000 9126 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-040-0000 8865 ROYAL VIEW CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-045-0000 9109 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624

151

127-0980-031-0000 2290 LINDAIRE AVE SAN JOSE CA 95128127-0950-008-0000 2438 CABRILLO DR HAYWARD CA 94545127-0480-057-0000 9307 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-107-0000 1006 4TH ST STE 701 SACRAMENTO CA 95814127-0410-003-0000 9169 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-091-0000 9247 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-046-0000 81 RIVER ASH CT SAN JOSE CA 95136127-0300-001-0000 9642 KUNZITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-063-0000 9269 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-003-0000 9184 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-020-0000 PO BOX 5394 EL DORADO HILLS CA 95762127-0370-033-0000 33203 PINTAIL ST WOODLAND CA 95695127-0480-077-0000 5506 STONEY CREEK PL SAN JOSE CA 95138127-0420-019-0000 9250 ELLERY PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-026-0000 8740 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-043-0000 9054 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-031-0000 9057 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-034-0000 9239 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-039-0000 9219 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-040-0000 9230 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-051-0000 5504 HEATHER FIELD WAY ELK GROVE CA 95757127-0490-024-0000 9218 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-023-0000 8840 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-022-0000 9313 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-006-0000 300 MURCHISON DR APT 300 MILLBRAE CA 94030127-0370-038-0000 9222 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-036-0000 9085 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-036-0000 9439 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-112-0000 8984 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-022-0000 9280 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-101-0000 8999 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-036-0000 9231 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-086-0000 9254 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-065-0000 9255 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-053-0000 9221 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-034-0000 9227 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-010-0000 9270 DAIRY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-065-0000 9208 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-081-0000 9350 MISTY SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-052-0000 9056 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-061-0000 9239 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-002-0000 9165 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-041-0000 9127 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-008-0000 9198 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-013-0000 9200 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-021-0000 9080 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-006-0000 8887 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-024-0000 9310 TRENARY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-003-0000 9009 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-086-0000 9157 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-047-0000 9020 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-003-0000 8762 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-036-0000 8051 CRESTA BLANCA CT SACRAMENTO CA 95829127-0470-015-0000 9124 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-037-0000 9200 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-009-0000 9219 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-042-0000 9467 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-022-0000 9244 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-050-0000 9024 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-057-0000 8961 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-115-0000 8972 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-016-0000 9251 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-006-0000 9172 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-056-0000 9483 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-055-0000 9126 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624

152

127-0230-021-0000 8866 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-014-0000 9267 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-005-0000 9216 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-047-0000 9118 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-024-0000 9068 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-014-0000 38 HIHIO RD HILO HI 96720127-0480-076-0000 9306 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-050-0000 9208 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-075-0000 9206 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-005-0000 9209 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-097-0000 9060 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-002-0000 9127 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-034-0000 8860 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-029-0000 9236 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-030-0000 9212 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-002-0000 9208 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-004-0000 9139 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-003-0000 9142 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-014-0000 9148 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-032-0000 9061 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-024-0000 8980 QUAIL LEAF CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-014-0000 9243 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-011-0000 9219 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-051-0000 9212 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-033-0000 9242 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-023-0000 9112 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-002-0000 8829 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-002-0000 PO BOX 292548 ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-002-0000 9108 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-019-0000 9201 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-028-0000 9220 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-028-0000 9186 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-003-0000 9226 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-022-0000 9121 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-022-0000 PO BOX 5422 EL DORADO HILLS CA 95762127-0510-010-0000 PO BOX 1442 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0510-011-0000 9164 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-014-0000 9096 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-056-0000 1536 FRUITVALE AVE APT 12 OAKLAND CA 94601127-0500-044-0000 9056 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-039-0000 9270 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-040-0000 9214 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-117-0000 9020 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-056-0000 9122 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-047-0000 6823 ROCKLEDGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0370-022-0000 9217 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-005-0000 9218 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-061-0000 9205 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-055-0000 9487 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-019-0000 9320 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-009-0000 8860 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-040-0000 9174 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-015-0000 8772 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-038-0000 9204 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-006-0000 9051 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-004-0000 9205 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-024-0000 9108 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-030-0000 9081 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-042-0000 9064 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-054-0000 9226 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-040-0000 9215 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-008-0000 9219 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-046-0000 9449 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-019-0000 PO BOX 30286 LAUGHLIN NV 89028127-0980-085-0000 9223 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624

153

127-0980-083-0000 2136 SHIANGZONE CT SAN JOSE CA 95121127-0980-092-0000 9251 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-046-0000 9451 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-042-0000 9058 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-049-0000 9178 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-062-0000 9243 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-008-0000 9278 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-067-0000 6600 STRATTON AVE CITRUS HEIGHTS CA 95621127-0500-034-0000 1123 VINTNER PL LIVERMORE CA 94550127-0020-006-0000 9001 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-017-0000 9133 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-019-0000 9128 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-018-0000 9085 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-014-0000 9207 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-016-0000 8984 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-008-0000 9008 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-030-0000 9255 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-035-0000 9325 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-010-0000 15182 DE LA PENA CIR RANCHO MURIETA CA 95683127-0300-034-0000 8882 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-044-0000 9238 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-010-0000 9225 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-099-0000 8195 POLO CROSSE AVE SACRAMENTO CA 95829127-0980-078-0000 PO BOX 581972 ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0990-040-0000 9048 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-024-0000 9288 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-038-0000 9274 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-055-0000 9215 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-035-0000 9073 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-004-0000 8969 COVEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-043-0000 5620 KINGSTON WAY SACRAMENTO CA 95822121-0170-028-0000 6852 BOA NOVA DR ELK GROVE CA 95757127-0400-060-0000 9260 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-052-0000 10531 SILENT WINGS WAY SACRAMENTO CA 95830127-0140-019-0000 3036 GAYWOOD CT SAN JOSE CA 95148127-0950-052-0000 9225 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-017-0000 9166 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-035-0000 8842 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-007-0000 9016 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-028-0000 9297 Fife Ranch Way Elk Grove CA 95624127-0300-014-0000 8823 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-041-0000 9250 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-021-0000 9274 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-064-0000 9208 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-010-0000 10393 GRACIOSA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95757127-0410-067-0000 9218 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-013-0000 9049 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-025-0000 13701 INDIO DR SLOUGHHOUSE CA 95683127-0520-041-0000 9062 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-027-0000 9017 MORGANFIELD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-051-0000 9200 LOUIS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-063-0000 9200 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-037-0000 9239 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-013-0000 9110 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-052-0000 9119 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-043-0000 9183 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-060-0000 9327 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-009-0000 9063 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-059-0000 9231 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-006-0000 9180 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-007-0000 9168 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-001-0000 9161 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-026-0000 9072 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-013-0000 8811 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-005-0000 8875 COUNTRY HILL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624

154

127-0990-044-0000 9032 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-013-0000 9152 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-032-0000 9313 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-111-0000 8988 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-055-0000 9351 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-036-0000 9329 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-007-0000 8890 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-019-0000 9073 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-033-0000 9104 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-056-0000 9219 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-007-0000 8002 HAMRIC CT ANTELOPE CA 95843127-0790-053-0000 9354 LOST SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-048-0000 9164 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-015-0000 8841 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-023-0000 PO BOX 231663 SACRAMENTO CA 95823121-0240-013-0000 9187 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-012-0000 9041 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-058-0000 9114 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-010-0000 8765 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-046-0000 9226 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-110-0000 8992 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-048-0000 9443 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-059-0000 9323 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-065-0000 9314 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-053-0000 9025 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-008-0000 9411 MAINLINE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-032-0000 9312 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-072-0000 9274 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-010-0000 9037 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-044-0000 9211 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-015-0000 8965 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-026-0000 9065 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-016-0000 9200 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-014-0000 9272 ELLERY PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-005-0000 9128 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-027-0000 8829 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-026-0000 9228 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-071-0000 8701 TIPTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-047-0000 9170 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-018-0000 22974 W SHEFFLER RD ELMIRA OR 97437127-0980-075-0000 9262 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-080-0000 9351 MISTY SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-012-0000 8793 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-017-0000 9189 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-001-0000 3001 I ST STE 300 SACRAMENTO CA 95816127-0620-027-0000 9032 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-006-0000 9220 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-010-0000 8761 BAMARCIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-038-0000 9223 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-091-0000 PO BOX 2285 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0480-082-0000 9270 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-013-0000 9047 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-029-0000 9180 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-035-0000 9079 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-039-0000 9208 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-007-0000 9135 FARRINGTON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-016-0000 9134 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-025-0000 8972 QUAIL LEAF CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-006-0000 5357 SPRINGCREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0980-045-0000 9234 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-004-0000 9001 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-037-0000 18 DELANO AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94112127-0370-029-0000 9212 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-054-0000 9127 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-012-0000 9158 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624

155

127-0490-034-0000 9219 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-045-0000 9175 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-023-0000 9242 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-060-0000 9235 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-033-0000 9213 PETTERSBURG CT ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0020-005-0000 8715 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-057-0000 9221 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-003-0000 9251 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-005-0000 8875 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-064-0000 9318 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-095-0000 9068 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-098-0000 9056 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-051-0000 9229 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-076-0000 827 7TH ST 301 SACRAMENTO CA 95814127-0370-024-0000 9205 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-012-0000 1180 CORPORATE WAY 302 SACRAMENTO CA 95831127-0510-029-0000 9003 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-068-0000 9267 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-037-0000 9267 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-029-0000 14 FLEUTI DR MORAGA CA 94556127-0010-017-0000 10060 GOETHE RD SACRAMENTO CA 95827127-0470-016-0000 9128 LATCHFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-084-0000 9219 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-033-0000 9243 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-012-0000 9491 MARIS LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-016-0000 8861 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-024-0000 8828 ST ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-054-0000 9211 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-081-0000 9274 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-001-0000 9114 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-041-0000 821 LA CORUNO ST DAVIS CA 95616127-0400-015-0000 413 WATSONIA CT SAN RAMON CA 94582127-0510-001-0000 9028 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-069-0000 9219 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-007-0000 9136 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-036-0000 8828 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-024-0000 PO BOX 956 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0980-089-0000 9239 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-016-0000 9059 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-056-0000 PO BOX 1832 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0990-050-0000 9080 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-017-0000 9078 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-023-0000 9304 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-038-0000 9171 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-025-0000 9261 SURVEY RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-100-0000 8995 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-062-0000 PO BOX 2757 SUNNYVALE CA 94087127-0230-037-0000 9116 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-014-0000 2204 CLOUD CREEK CT GOLD RIVER CA 95670127-0510-023-0000 9169 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-034-0000 9304 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-031-0000 9251 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-004-0000 PO BOX 1616 ELK GROVE CA 95759127-0230-029-0000 8861 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-046-0000 9171 LAGRANGE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-076-0000 9258 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-022-0000 8854 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-026-0000 9210 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-042-0000 3514 W ISLAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0300-019-0000 8868 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-009-0000 9222 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-074-0000 9200 PELHAM WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-017-0000 9065 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-049-0000 9200 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-023-0000 9030 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624

156

127-0490-017-0000 11960 MULDOON WAY RANCHO CORDOVA CA 95742127-0410-023-0000 9319 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-007-0000 9211 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-042-0000 9123 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-014-0000 9241 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-062-0000 9265 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-041-0000 9471 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-032-0000 9247 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-017-0000 9279 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-022-0000 9116 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-089-0000 9045 ALLENFORD PLZ ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-036-0000 9179 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-028-0000 8843 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-103-0000 9007 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-020-0000 9046 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-001-0000 9212 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-120-0000 9008 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-017-0000 9065 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-014-0000 9146 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-039-0000 9356 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-009-0000 9133 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-012-0000 9329 COLLISTON DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-053-0000 9052 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-033-0000 9308 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-047-0000 2878 GLEN ASCOT WAY SAN JOSE CA 95148127-0480-015-0000 9312 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-002-0000 9060 SHETLAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-013-0000 9149 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-084-0000 9262 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-022-0000 9251 CONANT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0240-016-0000 8758 RUBIA DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-053-0000 9208 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-015-0000 9271 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-046-0000 9105 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-007-0000 9224 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-014-0000 8969 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-069-0000 9319 CARNEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-059-0000 9456 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-061-0000 9261 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-012-0000 9206 DECORAH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-001-0000 8811 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-011-0000 8830 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-038-0000 9056 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-060-0000 9209 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-093-0000 9076 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-023-0000 9240 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-059-0000 28372 CUBBERLEY CT HAYWARD CA 94545127-0980-087-0000 9231 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-045-0000 9028 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-022-0000 9308 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-063-0000 9212 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-055-0000 9213 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-020-0000 9150 FOUR SEASONS DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-004-0000 9222 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-020-0000 9301 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-044-0000 6943 POWER INN RD SACRAMENTO CA 95828127-0370-036-0000 9243 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-020-0000 9229 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-041-0000 9044 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-007-0000 9176 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-018-0000 9132 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-010-0000 9236 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-016-0000 9185 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-026-0000 9200 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-003-0000 9133 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624

157

127-0410-008-0000 9172 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-021-0000 9204 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-011-0000 9160 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-058-0000 9217 RONAN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-028-0000 9073 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-046-0000 9230 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-044-0000 9050 QUAIL FEATHER WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-036-0000 9088 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-041-0000 9178 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-038-0000 9243 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-001-0000 9001 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-003-0000 9339 COLLISTON DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-027-0000 8754 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-043-0000 9214 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-028-0000 9208 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-033-0000 9423 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-003-0000 6728 FAIR OAKS BLVD 404 CARMICHAEL CA 95608127-0020-008-0000 9098 GENERATIONS DR ELK GROVE CA 95758127-0370-035-0000 9247 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-004-0000 9431 MARIS LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-032-0000 9219 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-052-0000 3805 DOLAN WAY WESTFIELD IN 46074127-0990-021-0000 9312 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624

3300 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 390 Roseville CA 956613711 Branch Center Road Sacramento CA 952273301 C Street, Ste. 100-B Sacramento CA 95816

127-0020-009-0000 8197 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0250-022-0000 8750 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0250-022-0000 8754 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-028-0000 8768 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-029-0000 8784 BRISKIN DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-023-0000 8810 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-001-0000 8811 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-024-0000 8828 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-002-0000 8829 ARMARIA CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-014-0000 8829 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-010-0000 8838 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-023-0000 8840 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-021-0000 8844 SCENIC ELK CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-022-0000 8854 SAINT ANTHONY CT MH ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-009-0000 8860 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-016-0000 8861 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-016-0000 8861 SCENIC ELK CT # B ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-021-0000 8866 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-033-0000 8874 SAINT JUDE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-005-0000 8875 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-020-0000 8880 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0300-007-0000 8888 COUNTRY HILL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-019-0000 8890 SAINT ANTHONY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-063-0000 8920 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-019-0000 8930 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-034-0000 8939 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-018-0000 8950 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-006-0000 8964 COVEY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-018-0000 8964 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-019-0000 8968 FIFE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-059-0000 8969 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-062-0000 8973 ELK GROVE FLORIN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-060-0000 8973 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-061-0000 8977 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-005-0000 8979 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-099-0000 8991 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-014-0000 8998 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-111-0000 8998 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-013-0000 9000 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624

158

127-0980-108-0000 9000 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-010-0000 9000 POPLAR HOLLOW LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-011-0000 9001 POPLAR HOLLOW LN ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-001-0000 9007 ELK GROVE FLORIN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-005-0000 9009 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-030-0000 9011 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-026-0000 9013 MORGANFIELD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-118-0000 9016 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-006-0000 9017 QUAIL KNOLL CT ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-005-0000 9019 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-032-0000 9019 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-052-0000 9021 QUAIL SONG CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-006-0000 9021 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0170-024-0000 9028 DELEON CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-008-0000 9029 VIRGINIA FIFE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-055-0000 9044 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-089-0000 9045 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-063-0000 9045 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-054-0000 9048 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-090-0000 9051 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-014-0000 9051 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-091-0000 9055 ALLENFORD PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-037-0000 9060 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-008-0000 9065 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-033-0000 9065 QUAIL TREE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0620-033-0000 9067 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-022-0000 9076 BOBWHITE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-007-0000 9080 POPLAR HOLLOW WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0020-010-0000 9090 CAMPBELL RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-020-0000 9093 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-060-0000 9100 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-034-0000 9100 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-061-0000 9101 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-044-0000 9113 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-051-0000 9115 MERRIFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-036-0000 9117 QUAIL TERRACE WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-043-0000 9119 NEPONSET DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-004-0000 9124 TUXFORD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-046-0000 9127 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-011-0000 9137 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-016-0000 9140 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0520-012-0000 9145 QUAIL TERRACE CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-107-0000 9150 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-012-0000 9151 HUBBARD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-107-0000 9160 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-010-0000 9164 KNEELAND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-005-0000 9170 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-037-0000 9175 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-008-0000 9180 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-025-0000 9181 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-042-0000 9182 MALDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0230-025-0000 9184 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0510-010-0000 9186 QUAIL BROOK CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-020-0000 9189 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-020-0000 9189 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0500-001-0000 9192 QUAIL COVE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-001-0000 9200 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-066-0000 9200 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-004-0000 9200 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-017-0000 9204 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-064-0000 9204 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-003-0000 9204 SUMMER POND CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-056-0000 9209 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-071-0000 9209 FAXON PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-052-0000 9209 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624

159

127-0950-041-0000 9211 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-036-0000 9211 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-031-0000 9215 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-083-0000 9215 DAIRY ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-012-0000 9215 EVERETT CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-054-0000 9217 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-044-0000 9218 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-046-0000 9219 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-041-0000 9220 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-047-0000 9223 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-027-0000 9224 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-039-0000 9226 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-010-0000 9227 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-032-0000 9227 WOLLASTON WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-008-0000 9228 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-059-0000 9228 RAINBOW CREEK WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-002-0000 9232 BROMFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-050-0000 9233 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-019-0000 9239 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0370-033-0000 9242 AMSDEN CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-020-0000 9243 WATER LILLY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-012-0000 9244 EARL FIFE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-032-0000 9248 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0160-060-0000 9250 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-019-0000 9250 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-078-0000 9250 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-077-0000 9251 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-064-0000 9251 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-031-0000 9254 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0490-017-0000 9255 SUMMER TEA WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-015-0000 9255 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-017-0000 9258 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-029-0000 9259 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-019-0000 9261 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-016-0000 9262 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-028-0000 9263 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-067-0000 9263 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0400-059-0000 9264 LITCHFIELD CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-027-0000 9267 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0480-021-0000 9269 DEVER CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0950-026-0000 9271 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0420-014-0000 9272 ELLERY PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-016-0000 9275 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-008-0000 9278 DAIRY CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0980-071-0000 9278 LOUIS ST ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-009-0000 9287 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-005-0000 9291 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-019-0000 9291 WATERMAN RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-010-0000 9295 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-1030-008-0000 9299 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-024-0000 9300 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-035-0000 9300 WHITTEMORE DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-029-0000 9301 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-034-0000 9321 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0990-018-0000 9324 FIFE RANCH WAY ELK GROVE CA 95624121-0180-012-0000 9345 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0140-040-0000 9350 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-037-0000 9350 SAVIN PL ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-077-0000 9350 SHELDON RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-082-0000 9354 MISTY SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0790-078-0000 9359 MISTY SPRINGS CT ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0470-024-0000 9373 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-003-0000 9407 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-060-0000 9431 BOND RD ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0010-060-0000 9431 BOND RD MH ELK GROVE CA 95624

160

127-0430-047-0000 9445 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0410-047-0000 9447 CROWELL DR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0430-057-0000 9448 RINGE CIR ELK GROVE CA 95624127-0340-005-0000 9471 MARIS LN ELK GROVE CA 95624

161

planning commission staff report · the property. the discharge of water from the site occurs when...

Documents