The City of Roseville completed a Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Roseville Retention Basin Project. The EIR evaluated a major stormwater-retention project in the Reason Farms / Pleasant Grove Creek area, with the purpose of reducing downstream flooding caused by existing, approved, and future development in Roseville and portions of south Placer County. The project was designed to provide approximately 2,530 acre-feet of retention storage and was tied to the City’s Pleasant Grove Drainage Fee, which was based on an 8-day, 100-year flood-event analysis.
The EIR is important to the Phillip Road Site history because it documents the original public-purpose planning context for the broader Reason Farms / Al Johnson Wildlife Area property: flood mitigation, stormwater retention, habitat/open-space opportunities, and passive recreation. The EIR described the project area as extending to Phillip Road and contemplated City-managed public open space, habitat restoration, recreational trails, and related public-infrastructure uses — a materially different public-purpose framework than later proposals to sell, rezone, and industrially develop a portion of the site.
This is a key historical marker because the current Phillip Road Site proposal would shift part of that public-purpose land-use context toward private industrial / innovation development.
Final EIR for the Roseville Retention Basin Project
The City of Roseville completed its purchase of the 1,754-acre Al Johnson Wildlife Area, formerly known as Reason Farms, for flood protection and stormwater-retention planning. The City states that agricultural uses such as rice, dry farming, and cattle grazing were intended to continue until the retention basin was built.
For an exact closing date, the best next source would likely be the recorded deed, escrow/closing documents, or the City Council agenda item approving the purchase.
City of Roseville declared farmland located at 6382 Phillip Road as “surplus” property, without issuing a Notice of Availability (NOA) as required by Government Code section 54222.
Why did the City declare as "surplus" the Phillip Road Site?
- Phillip Road Site is part of the broader Reason Farms property, originally acquired for the Pleasant Grove Retention Basin flood-control project
- Phillip Road Site is traversed by the Pleasant Grove Creek
- Phillip Road Site is adjacent to residential neighborhoods, schools, soccer fields, bike paths (sensitive receptors)
- Phillip Road Site is far from highways and would increase truck traffic on Blue Oaks Blvd.
City Manager signed Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement (ERNA) with Panattoni >> City of Roseville Resolution No. 20-443 On 11/18/2020 City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement (ERNA) with PDC Sacramento LPIV, LLC for purchase of the farmland at 6328…
City of Roseville signed industrial development agreement with Panattoni >> City of Roseville Resolution No. 21-080 City Manager executed Option and Purchase and Sale Agreement (“PSA”) between City of Roseville and industrial developer (Panattoni Development Corporation, aka PDC Sacramento LPIV, LLC). $34,519/acre does not reflect fair market value (FMV) price…
ROSEVILLE COUNCIL COMMUNICATION | Meeting Date: 11/17/2021 Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a First Amendment to Option and Purchase and Sale Agreement with PDC Sacramento LPIV, LLC for property located at 6382 Phillip Road. According to this initial extension, the…
Extension of “Due Diligence Period” to be 180 days from the time that Buyer is issued entitlements by the City of Roseville. Second Amendment makes the duration of the Purchase and Sale Agreement ("PSA") temporally indefinite (open-ended). Buyer is Panattoni aka PDC Sacramento LPIV, LLC. Concerning performance of the exclusive…
The City of Roseville sent a formal response to the California Department of Housing and Community Development regarding the proposed disposition of the 6382 Phillip Road property. The City described the site as approximately 237 acres of vacant greenbelt land, with about 182 developable acres, originally acquired as part of the broader Reason Farms property for the Pleasant Grove Retention Basin flood-control project. The City stated that the Phillip Road parcel was later deemed unnecessary for that flood-control purpose and had been envisioned since 2006 as a future industrial park and jobs center.
Read Roseville's August 8, 2023 letter to HCD
The California Department of Housing and Community Development issued a Notice of Violation to the City of Roseville regarding the proposed disposition of approximately 236.26 acres at 6382 Phillip Road. HCD concluded that the City violated the Surplus Land Act by entering into contracts to dispose of the property without first complying with the Act’s procedural requirements.
HCD stated that the City’s 2019 notice was not enough because the City later entered into an Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement in 2020 and a Purchase and Sale Agreement after AB 1486’s amendments to the Surplus Land Act had taken effect. HCD found that Roseville had not provided evidence that required Notices of Availability were sent to HCD and affordable housing developers for low- and moderate-income housing purposes.
HCD further determined that the City did not qualify for the Surplus Land Act “grandfathering” provision because it had not entered into a legally binding disposition agreement by September 30, 2019. HCD identified violations tied to the 2020 developer agreement, the 2021 Purchase and Sale Agreement, and later amendments.
List of SLA Violations Enumerated in the December 4, 2023 NOV
- City entered into contracts to dispose of the Phillip Road property without first complying with the Surplus Land Act.
HCD stated that Roseville violated the SLA by entering into disposition contracts before satisfying required SLA procedures. - City failed to issue required Notices of Availability for low- and moderate-income housing purposes.
HCD found that Roseville had not provided evidence that required NOAs were sent to HCD and affordable housing developers as required by Government Code section 54222. - City did not qualify for the SLA “grandfathering” provision.
HCD stated the City would have needed to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement or other binding disposition agreement by September 30, 2019, but did not do so. - City violated the SLA by entering into the November 18, 2020 ERNA.
HCD identified the Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement with the developer as a violation because it occurred after AB 1486 took effect and without following the amended SLA process. - City violated the SLA by entering into the Purchase and Sale Agreement.
HCD identified the PSA with the buyer as another violation because the City still had not followed the statutory procedures for disposing of surplus land. - City violated the SLA again by approving later amendments to the PSA.
HCD identified the November 17, 2021 and October 19, 2022 amendments as further violations because they continued the disposition process without SLA compliance.
The letter gave the City 60 days to cure or correct the violations, warned that failure to do so by February 4, 2024 could trigger a penalty equal to 30% of the final sales price, and urged the City to suspend further actions to dispose of the property.
Read HCD's Notice to Roseville About its Violation
The City of Roseville sent a response acknowledging receipt of HCD’s December 4, 2023 Notice of Violation concerning the proposed disposition of the 6382 Phillip Road property. The City stated that it had met with HCD on December 12 and December 21 to discuss HCD’s concerns and assured HCD that no further action would be taken to dispose of the property until the City completed discussions with HCD and identified a path forward.
The City maintained that it began the surplus-property process in good faith in 2019, but acknowledged key facts central to HCD’s violation finding: the City did not enter into an Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement with the developer until November 18, 2020, the property was not disposed of by December 31, 2022, and it still had not been disposed of as of the date of the letter.
The letter also confirmed that the Phillip Road project remained on hold while the developer performed technical studies, revised the project scope, and conducted community outreach. The City noted that it would discuss potential 2024 Surplus Land Act exemptions with the developer and anticipated receiving revised plans around March 2024, potentially including new land uses not previously contemplated.
Read City's response to HCD
The California Department of Housing and Community Development responded to Roseville’s December 22, 2023 letter regarding HCD’s Notice of Violation for the 6382 Phillip Road property. HCD stated that it intended to enforce Government Code section 54230.5 if the City failed to cure or correct the Surplus Land Act violations identified in the December 4, 2023 Notice of Violation.
HCD acknowledged that the proposed Phillip Road project was on hold while the developer completed technical studies and that the City expected revised project plans around March 2024. HCD also noted that the City needed additional time to evaluate whether any Surplus Land Act exemptions might apply to the proposed property disposition.
Although HCD agreed to continue working with the City beyond the 60-day cure period, it expressly preserved its right to enforce the Surplus Land Act if the violations were not resolved.
Read About HCD's Right to Enforce Surplus Land Act
The City of Roseville and the California Department of Housing and Community Development entered into a settlement agreement resolving HCD’s December 4, 2023 Notice of Violation concerning the proposed sale of the 6382 Phillip Road property. The agreement recites that the City owns approximately 236.26 acres at 6382 Phillip Road and that HCD had found the proposed sale to the developer violated the Surplus Land Act.
Under the agreement, the City agreed to pay a 30% statutory penalty based on the applicable disposition value, calculated using the greater of the final sale price or fair market value as determined by an independent appraisal. The City also agreed to deposit the penalty into a Local Housing Trust Fund for affordable housing purposes.
The agreement further requires a 15% affordability covenant for any residential units developed on the property, with long-term affordability restrictions, and provides for HCD monitoring and semiannual City reporting.
The settlement also states that if the existing sale agreement is terminated and the sale is not finalized, the City must follow standard Surplus Land Act procedures before any future disposition of the property. The signature page shows execution by HCD, the City Manager, and the City Attorney in September 2024.
September 16, 2024 agreement
The City reported that Panattoni withdrew the earlier Roseville Industrial Park application, File # PL21-0193. For non-lawyers, this marks the end of the first version of the industrial proposal and the start of a reset before the later Phillip Road Site proposal.
The previously proposed project, formerly known as Roseville Industrial Park (File #PL21-0193), was withdrawn by the developer, Panattoni Development Company.
Previously Proposed Project Archive
The City reported that Panattoni submitted a revised application, File # PL24-1010, and that Panattoni refers to the redesign as “The Balanced Plan.” This is the formal beginning of the current entitlement track.
Panattoni issued a press release promoting projected jobs, economic output, labor income, and fiscal benefits. For readers, this shows how the developer publicly framed the project as economically beneficial before environmental review was completed.
Panattoni Press Release (March 12, 2025)
The State Clearinghouse listed the project’s Notice of Preparation for a Draft EIR as received on June 5, 2025, with the City of Roseville as lead agency. This is when the current project formally entered the CEQA EIR track at the state clearinghouse.
SCH Number 2025060240
INFILL PCL 373 - Phillip Road Site
NOP - Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR
The NOP noticed a public scoping meeting for June 24, 2025 at Martha Riley Library. The City later reported that about 30 people attended and heard an overview of the project, the planning/environmental process, and next steps.
Notice of Public Scoping Meeting
On November 11, 2025, Panattoni Development submitted revised plans for the current application (File # PL24-1010), known as the Phillip Road Site project.
Excerpt from City Manager’s Quarterly Report, October–December 2025
"Phillip Road Site – On November 11, 2025, Panattoni Development submitted revised plans for the Phillip Road Site. These updates reflect minor changes made in response to the City’s ongoing review.
The project plans and supporting application materials are nearly complete. There will be several opportunities for public input throughout spring 2026. The project schedule anticipates that the draft environmental impact report will be available for public review and comment in early 2026."
This shows that the "The Balanced Plan" was still fluid, being refined while environmental review was moving forward.
The City stated the Draft EIR public review period began February 3, 2026, and CEQAnet lists the Draft EIR record with state review beginning February 4, 2026. This is when the public could review the City’s environmental analysis and submit formal comments.
Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
The City announced that the Planning Commission meeting included a public meeting to receive oral comments on the Draft EIR. The City stated the Commission did not take action on the Draft EIR at that meeting.
The proposed Phillip Road Project would result in the following significant and unavoidable adverse impacts; that is, no feasible mitigation is available to reduce the project’s impacts to a less-than-significant level.
- Transportation and Circulation: Conflict with Adopted Policies, Plans, or Programs Regarding Pedestrian Facilities (project); and Conflict with Adopted Policies, Plans, or Programs Regarding Transit Facilities (project)
- Air Quality: Construction Emissions (cumulative); Long-term Operational Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and
Ozone Precursors (project and cumulative); Toxic Air Contaminants (cumulative) - Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change: Generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Either Directly or Indirectly, That May Have a Significant Impact on the Environment (project and cumulative)
- Noise and Vibration: Exposure of Existing Sensitive Receptors to Excessive Traffic Noise Levels (project)
- Utilities and Service Systems: New or Expanded Utility Infrastructure or Determination of Inadequate Capacity (cumulative)
- Aesthetics: Visual Character and Quality (cumulative); and Light and Glare (cumulative)