CollectionGardens of Noor Cemetery Collection

Gardens of Noor Cemetery Collection

FAQ

Plain-language answers grounded in the supplied planning record.

What is the current project?

The May 27, 2026 County referral describes Use Permit UP-22;2-3 as 1,832 grave sites in seven blocks, 64 permanent parking spaces plus driveway parking for up to 100 cars, permanent restrooms, and about 60 funerals per month with up to 50 attendees per event.

Is the current proposal still 50,000 graves with a worship building?

No. Those figures describe older versions of the project. They remain relevant to the history of the application but should not be presented as the current County project description.

Why does the archive discuss Sacramento and Placer counties?

The applicant’s own current project narrative says the cemetery is intended to serve the Muslim community in Amador County, Sacramento County, Placer County, and surrounding areas. The regional draw is therefore part of the applicant’s stated project objective.

Why is traffic still an open question?

The current application states about 60 funeral events per month and 50 attendees per event, but gives an average increase of 20 vehicles per day without a dedicated traffic methodology in the supplied packet. Peak funeral/procession conditions and the additional driveway-parking concept also warrant explanation.

What did Environmental Health require in 2023?

The June 22, 2023 deficiency notice required a qualified soils/hydrology/hydrogeology study addressing cemetery suitability and protection of ground and surface water, including percolation, setbacks, monitoring wells, flood areas, wet-weather testing, and water-table depths.

Has the County approved the project?

The records supplied for this collection show the project advancing through TAC and CEQA review in 2026. This collection does not treat the project as finally approved unless and until a final County decision record is published.

Are public-comment claims treated as facts?

No. Public comments are published as submitted viewpoints. When a comment uses obsolete project figures or makes an allegation not independently established by an official or technical record, the archive says so.