Sacramento approves 440-acre land annex near airport for hotels and restaurants
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Sacramento council approved annex of 450 acres for airport-area hotels, warehouses.
- Project faces environmental and traffic impact findings and local opposition.
- Proposal will go to LAFCo and county supervisors; project promises 5,000 jobs.
The Sacramento City Council provided a crucial stamp of approval Tuesday night to a project that will build warehouses, hotels and restaurants on about 450 acres of land currently outside city limits.
The development, known as the Airport South Industrial, will be located southeast of the intersection of Powerline Road and Interstate 5 in an unincorporated area of Sacramento County. The area — historically used as farmland — will be annexed, meaning the land will be brought into city limits.
Following Tuesday’s approval, the proposal will head to the Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission and Sacramento County Board of Supervisors for further approval. The commission will likely vote on the proposal in March, said Cheryle Hodge, principal planner for the city.
The project has been debated since an application was submitted to the city in May 2021.
Residents living in the area and local environmentalists have cited a litany of concerns including traffic congestion, loss of farmland and proximity to Paso Verde, a public elementary school within the Natomas Unified School District. The development will result in “significant and unavoidable impacts” to the region’s air quality plan and an increase in pollutants, according to the project’s environmental impact report.
Supporters have pointed to the need for urban growth and the project’s economic benefits. The project, upon completion, is estimated to create about 5,000 jobs and generate roughly $3.4 million a year in general fund revenue, according to a city staff report.
As proposed, the project will feature acres designated for industrial, retail and hotel uses. The area has been routinely used for hay and rice fields since 1937.
“This is never easy, and in the end, there are those who will agree and those who will not…I will be supporting it in order to make a difference in our city, in the community and in our region,” said Councilmember Rick Jennings.
Jennings joined the council in a 5-2 vote approving the project. Council members Karina Talamantes and Mai Vang voted no.
Talamantes said her opposition was mostly rooted in the lack of communication between the developer and the community.
Under amendments added Tuesday, the developer will be required to meet quarterly with the North Natomas Community Coalition to provide updates on the project. A buffer zone was also extended by 125 feet between a specific parcel of the development and residential areas.
“The most important thing to me is to make sure that people are listened to and so as the council member here in Natomas, I will not be supporting this project,” Talamantes said.
Council members Lisa Kaplan and Caity Maple recused themselves from the discussion and vote. Kaplan cited a conflict of interest from living near the proposed development. Maple had previously said her recusal stemmed from her husband being a board member on the Environmental Council of Sacramento, which has a lawsuit against the project.
Tuesday night continued a lengthy conversation on the project at the council’s Nov. 18 meeting, which featured more than 50 public speakers. Mayor Kevin McCarty had recommended extending the discussion into a second meeting.
About 30 speakers arrived for the sequel and continued to offer varied views on the development. Another 193 online comments were provided prior to the meeting, Talamantes said.
Among those in support were dozens of members of local unions representing carpenters, electricians and plumbers.
“Remember, this project not only is going to create jobs in the construction sector, but it’s going to create jobs afterwards,” said Matt Nootenboom, a member of IBEW Local 340, a labor union for electrical workers. “This is a no-brainer.”
Those in opposition reiterated previous worries that the project would develop on land that the city agreed to protect in the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan of 1997. They urged the council to delay voting until mitigation efforts were more clearly defined.
“This is not about jobs vs. the environment,” said Heather Fargo, president of the Environmental Council of Sacramento and former Sacramento mayor. “We have enough room in this county and in the city to do both.”
