2010/12/07 City Council Resolution 2010-135RESOLUTION NO. 2010-135
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE MAP
AND TEXT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEST SPECIFIC PLAN
PROJECT LOCATED NORTHEAST OF BODWAY PARKWAY AND VALLEY
HOUSE DRIVE (APN'S 047 - 111 -030) IN SONOMA COUNTY, CA
WHEREAS, the applicant, Redwood Equities LLC, has filed Planning Application No.
PL2003 -031 SP proposing General Plan Amendments, and related certification of a Final
Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "), in connection with a proposed mixed -use community
located northeast of the intersection of Bodway Parkway and Valley House Drive (APN 047-
111 -030 ) (the "Project "), in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code
( "RPMC ");
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to General Plan ( "Southeast Specific Plan
General Plan Amendments ") would alter the configuration of the existing land use designations
onsite and add Public /Institutional and Parks /Recreation designations. The project site is
currently designated Rural Estate Residential, Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, and Mixed Use. The proposed Southeast Specific Plan General Plan Amendments
are attached as Exhibit A;
. WHEREAS, the Southeast Specific Plan General Plan Amendments would amend the
Land Use Map of the General Plan as provided on the amended General Plan Land Use Diagram
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A;
WHEREAS, at a public hearing on November 16, 2010, the Planning Commission
reviewed the Final EIR prepared for the Project; recommended its certification by the City
Council; and has otherwise carried out all requirements for the Project pursuant to CEQA;
WHEREAS, at a public hearing on November 16, 2010, the Planning Commission
reviewed the proposed amendments to the Land Use Map and text of the General Plan for the
Project; and recommended its approval by the City Council;
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code section 65358, the City has done
fewer than four general plan amendments in 2010;
WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the RPMC, public hearing notices
were mailed to all property owners within an area exceeding a three hundred foot radius of the
subject property and a public hearing was published for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first
public hearing in the Community Voice;
WHEREAS, the City Council has certified the Final EIR prepared for the proposal in
Resolution in 2010 -134;
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the proposal;
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in
the General Plan Amendment application for the proposal
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert
Park makes the following findings and determinations with respect to the proposed General Plan
Amendment and amendments to Land Use Map:
Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. The City Council certified the Final EIR for this Project, including
adoption of associated CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as described in City Council Resolution No.
2010 -134, approved on December 7, 2010 concurrently with the City Council's approval of this
Resolution.
Section 3. Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following findings
concerning the General Plan amendments proposed by Planning Application No. PL2003 -031 SP:
1. That the proposed site is appropriate for development under the General Plan's
Land Use Designations for the site.
Criteria Satisfied. The proposed General Plan amendments would be the same
as the current General Plan land use designations but slightly reconfigured. The
proposed amendments would also add Parks land use designation to the site to
ensure adequate area for future parklands and, Public /Institutional for the area
planned for a future City water tank site.
2. That the proposed General Plan amendments would be consistent with specific
policies in the Land Use Element of the General Plan relative to the proposed
development.
Criteria Satisfied. The proposed amendments are consistent with specific
policies in the Land Use Element of the General Plan applicable to the Southeast
Specific Plan area. The policies establish a primarily residential development
with a mixed use land use designation for commercial and multi - family uses. The
proposed development implements. the existing land designations and proposes no
changes to the existing policies envisioned in the General Plan and is therefore
consistent with such specific policies.
3. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public
testimony regarding the proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use
Map.
Criteria Satisfied. A duly noticed public hearing on the proposed General Plan
Amendments was held on December 7, 2010.
4. That the proposed Project with the proposed General Plan amendments is
consistent with the General Plan.
Criteria Satisfied. The General Plan Amendment, and consistency of the Project
with the General Plan, are discussed in the application materials, the Final EIR,
the Specific Plan, staff reports, and submittals by the Project applicant. The City
adopts the conclusions and analysis of those documents regarding General Plan
consistency. The Project, including the General Plan Amendment, is consistent
with the General Plan and will result in an internally consistent General Plan.
S. The General Plan Amendment approved for this Project will not cause the
General Plan to become internally inconsistent.
Criteria Satisfied. The General Plan Amendment proposed by the Project
Sponsors better implements the General Plan policies and goals than does the land
use plan depicted in the General Plan, as explained in the Specific Plan and staff
reports. The General Plan Amendment and the remainder of the General Plan
comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of polices
for the City. The various land uses authorized for the Project are compatible with
the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General
Plan, as amended. The Project is compatible with and conforms to the objectives,
policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The
Project furthers the objectives and policies of the General Plan and does not,
obstruct their attainment. The Project is compatible with and in harmony with the
General Plan goals and policies. The Project is in harmony with surrounding
neighborhoods, and the site is physically suitable for the development proposed.
6 That the City has considered and evaluated the goals, objectives and policies of
the General Plan and finds that the proposed General Plan amendments are in
compliance with the General Plan.
Criteria Satisfied. The General Plan comprises many objectives, policies,
principles, programs, standards, proposals and action plans (collectively,
"policies "), as well as performance standards. The City recognizes that the
policies necessarily compete with each other. The City has considered all
applicable General Plan policies and the extent to which the project conforms to
and potentially competes with each of those policies.
The City has fully evaluated the extent to which the Project achieves each policy,
including those pertaining to compatibility of land use, protection of open space,
standards regarding geology, soils and earthquake risks, hazardous materials,
flood hazards and drainage, protection of water quality, protection of biological
resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and local housing needs,
jobs/housing balance, noise, protection air quality, protection of visual resources,
standards for public services and utilities, protection of architectural and historic
resources, the provision of housing for all sectors of the economic community,
and the provision of employment opportunities for residents of the City. The City
has also fully considered the Project's compliance with all goals, policies and
objectives in the General Plan, and finds the Project in compliance with the
General Plan.
7. The City finds that this Project complies with the requirements in the City's Water
Supply Resolution 2004 -95.
Criteria Satisfied. The City has evaluated the proposed use of water within the
Project and finds the proposed water conservation and off set practices are
reasonable based on industry standards and the California Urban Water.
Conservation Council Best Management Practices. The proposed long -term
operational strategy is reasonable, provides finding to assure that the water
conservation savings are maintained, and are supported by the City's Water
Conservation Program.
The proposed development will not exceed the water demand projections outlined
in the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) dated January 2005 based on review of
existing customer water use and review of City's water supply management. The
City will be able to manage the Net Consumptive Use under all hydrologic
conditions using a mix of water supplies outlined in WSA based on the projected
demands not exceeding those identified in WSA.
Based on the City Engineers analysis and findings, included in his memorandum
dated October 4, 2010, the project will not cause the City to exceed an Average
Annual Groundwater Pumping rate of 2.3 mgd therefore the constraints imposed
in Section 4.d of the Water Policy Resolution do not apply. The project will not
affect industrial or agriculture water demands or supplies as those accounted for
in the WSA.
8. The City finds that the balance achieved by the Project among competing General
Plan policies is acceptable.
Criteria Satisfied. The Project achieves each applicable policy to some extent,
and represents a reasonable accommodation of all applicable competing policies
in the General Plan. The Project promotes the General Plan goals referenced in
the CEQA Statement of Overriding Considerations approved by City Council
Resolution No. 2010 -134 on December 7, 2010 concurrently with the City
Council's approval of this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that it
does hereby adopt and approve Application No. PL2003 -031 SP, General Plan Amendments for a
proposed mixed -use community located northeast of Valley House Drive and Bodway Parkway
(APN 47- 111 -030), as described in the Southeast Specific Plan General Plan Amendments
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, in its entirety.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that it does hereby adopt and
amend the General Plan Land Use Diagram so as to conform with the General Plan Amendments
recommended herein by adopting the amended General Plan Land Use Diagram attached to
this Resolution in Exhibit A.
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert
Park on this 7th day of December, 2010.
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
Mayor
BELFORTE: AYE BREEZE: AYE CALLINAN: AYE MACKENZIE: AYE STAFFORD: AYE
AYES: (5) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0)
EXHIBIT A
SOUTHEAST SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
City of Rohnert Park
Southeast Specific Plan:
General Plan Amendment
October 27, 2010
DRAFT
ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN- 4TH ED.
LOG OF AMENDMENTS
OCTOBER 2010
October 27, 2010
Description: Southeast Specific Plan. File # Resolution No.
1. Dia2ram Revision: Amend Figure 2.2 -1, "General Plan Diagram," as follows:
a. Relocate the area designated as Mixed -Use from the northeast corner of the Specific Plan Area to the
southeast corner of the Specific Plan area, at the comer of Bodway Parkway and Valley House Drive
b. Amend the location and configuration of the areas designated as Rural Estate, Low Density, and
Medium Density.
c. Modify the size, location, and configuration of the area designated as Park.
d. Amend the designation of Valley House Road from a Major Arterial to a Minor Arterial.
2. Text Revision: Amend Rural Estate Residential text on Page 2 -20 to include the Southeast Specific
Plan Area.
3. Text Revision: Amend P 2 -24, Text and Table 2.3 -1, update acreages in the Canon Manor and Southeast
Column as follows:
a. Change Estate Residential acreage from "210" to "204."
b. Change Low Density Residential acreage from 70" to 1164."
c. Change Medium Density Residential acreage "20" to "27."
d. Change Mixed Use acreage "10" to 117."
e. Change Parks /Open Space acreage "30" to "17."
f. Change Total acreage "340" to 11319."
g. Add footnote for Canon Manor acreages.
Revisions are based upon the following assumed acreages extrapolated from Table 2.4 -3 as revised October
2002, and the assumption that acreages for Canon Manor have not changed:
1. Canon Manor acreages were derived by subtracting assumed Southeast Specific Plan acreages from
Table 2.4 -3 from the "Canon Manor and Southeast" column of the adopted Table 2.4 -1 as rev. 10102.
2. Whole numbers are used in proposed table to match the existing format of the General Plan.
4. Text Revision: Amend P 2 -38, Table 2.4 -3, "Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area ", as follows:
a. Delete "Minimum and Maximum" from all column headings and add "Approximate."
b. Change the range of.Rural/Estate Residential gross acres from "22 -28" to "15 -20" and Housing Units
from "30 -50" to "25 -30."
c. Change the range of Low Density Residential gross acres from "28 -32" to "20 -22" and Housing Units
from "145 -165" to "125- 130."
d. Change the range of Medium Density Residential gross acres from "18 -22" to "26 -29" and Housing
Units from 11180 -220" to 11230- 240."
e. Change the range of Mixed -Use Development gross acres from "10 -14" to "5 -10," Housing Units from
"55 -75" to "80 -90," and Non - residential Building Area (1,000 s.f.) from "180 -220" to "10 ".
f. Delete the Open Space land use category.
g. Add Public/Institutional with a gross acreage of " <1"
Canon Manor
acres
Southeast (acres)
per Table 2.4 -3 rev. 10102
Southeast (acres)
per S eci tc Plan Z
Residential
Estate
188
22
16
Low Density
42
28
22
Medium Density
0
20
27
Mixed Use
0
10
7
Parks/Open Space
9
21
8
Total
239
101
1 80
1. Canon Manor acreages were derived by subtracting assumed Southeast Specific Plan acreages from
Table 2.4 -3 from the "Canon Manor and Southeast" column of the adopted Table 2.4 -1 as rev. 10102.
2. Whole numbers are used in proposed table to match the existing format of the General Plan.
4. Text Revision: Amend P 2 -38, Table 2.4 -3, "Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area ", as follows:
a. Delete "Minimum and Maximum" from all column headings and add "Approximate."
b. Change the range of.Rural/Estate Residential gross acres from "22 -28" to "15 -20" and Housing Units
from "30 -50" to "25 -30."
c. Change the range of Low Density Residential gross acres from "28 -32" to "20 -22" and Housing Units
from "145 -165" to "125- 130."
d. Change the range of Medium Density Residential gross acres from "18 -22" to "26 -29" and Housing
Units from 11180 -220" to 11230- 240."
e. Change the range of Mixed -Use Development gross acres from "10 -14" to "5 -10," Housing Units from
"55 -75" to "80 -90," and Non - residential Building Area (1,000 s.f.) from "180 -220" to "10 ".
f. Delete the Open Space land use category.
g. Add Public/Institutional with a gross acreage of " <1"
h. Change the range of Total gross acres from "101" to "80," Housing Units from "410 -510" to "475
Max.," and Non - residential Building Area (1,000 s.f.) from "180 -220" to 6610."
5. Text Revision: Amend P 2 -38, LU -24 and LU -25 by moving the italicized text from LU -25 to LU -24. Add
"in the mixed use area" to clarify LU -25 pertains to mixed use development.
6. Diagram Revision: Amend Figure 2.5 -2, "Urban Growth Boundary and Annexation Areas," to remove the
Southeast Specific Plan Area from the Annexation areas.
7. Text Revisions: Amend P 3 -11, Policy CD -7 to delete the last bullet which reads "Along Petaluma Hill
Road, north of Valley House Drive, require any new development on the western side of the street to be
setback at least 50 feet from the edge of the right -of- way." This text reflects Planning Commission Opinion
from the November 8, 2007 Study Session.
8. Diagram Revision: Add Illustrative Diagram as Figure 3.2 -13, Southeast Specific Plan Illustrative to
page 3 -39.
9. Diagram Revision: Amend Figure 4.1 -1, "Master Street Plan ", to change Studevant Drive from a Minor
Collector to a local street from Valley House Drive to E. Cotati
10. Text Revision: Amend Page 4 -15, Table 4.1 -4, to remove Studevant Drive
11. Diagram Revision: Amend Figure 4.4 -1, "Bicycle System ", to change Valley House Drive from a Class II
Bike Lane to a Class I Bike Trail.
12. Diagram Revision: Amend Figure 5.2 -1, "Parks and Schools Diagram, ", as follows:
a. Relocate the Park land use from the Canon Manor area to be entirely located within the SESPA.
b. Resize and reconfigure the Park from a large circle to a rectangle.
13. Text Revision: Amend Page 9 -65, Table 9.5 -2, to show the Southeast Specific Plan as "A" Approved.
14. Text Revision: Amend text regarding the Southeast Specific Plan on page 9 -67 to read as follows: "The
General Plan Diagram provides for approximately 5 -10 acres of mixed -use development, which could result
in the development of approximately 80 -90 units, 20 -22 acres of Low Density Residential, and 26 -29 acres
of Medium Density Residential in the Southeast Specific Plan Area. The Southeast Area also includes about
15 -20 acres of Rural Estate Residential land..."
15. Diagram Revision: Amend Appendix C: Rohnert Park Housing Sites to show new City limit that includes
the Southeast Specific Plan Area and change the summary of the Southeast. Areas SP as follows:
a. Change affordable units from "71" to 6672"
b. Change Other from "404" to "403"
C� Rural Estate Residential (up to 2 un /ac)
Low Density Residential (4 -6 un /ac)
Medium Density Residential (6 -12 un /ac)
ROM High Density Residential (12 -30 un /ac)
Commercial
N Neighborhood Commercial
R Regional Commercial
LJ Industrial
Mixed Use
Office
Public /Institutional
Parks
Open Space -
`f" Environmental
Conservation
UY r T T a RM AT I Ali maps are intended to be consistent with the General Plan Diagram.
".... a,a.n n. ... ., Additional adjustments to the other maps may be made for consistency
Open Space - Agriculture
and Resource Management
® Community Separator
owrm 1090 ° Major Arterial (4 -6 lanes)
—� Minor Arterial (2 lanes)
w� -��• Major Collector (4 lanes)
— ..... Minor Collector (2 lanes)
Figure 2.2 -1
General Plan Diagram
(Rev. Oct 2010)
Rohnert Park General Plan
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The classifications in this section represent adopted City policy. They are meant to be broad
enough to give the City flexibility in implementing City policy, but clear enough to provide
sufficient direction to carry out the General Plan. The City's Zoning Ordinance contains more
detailed provisions and standards to implement these classifications. More than one zoning
district may be consistent with a single General Plan land use classification.
Residential
Four residential land use classifications are established to provide for development of a full
range of housing types (mixed -use classifications that permit residential uses are included
later in this section). Densities are stated as the number of housing units per gross acre of
developable land, provided that at least one housing unit may be built on each existing legal
parcel designated for residential use.
Development would be required within the density range (both maximum and minimum)
stipulated in the classification. Second units permitted by local regulation and State - mandated
density bonuses for provision of affordable housing are in addition to densities otherwise
permitted in each of the residential land use classifications.
Assumed average densities listed are used to calculate probable housing unit and population
holding capacity. Neither the averages nor the totals constitute General Plan policy.
Population densities corresponding to the housing unit densities can be obtained. by
multiplying each housing unit by 2.62, the average projected Rohnert Park household size in
2020, according to the Association of Bay Area Governments' (ABAG) Projections `98.
Rural Estate Residential
Single - family detached residential development at densities of 2.0 housing units per gross
acre or less. This classification is intended for two-three areas: Canon Manor, Southeast Specific
Plan Area, and at designated locations at the city's ultimate physical edge on the eastside to
provide transition between urban and open space uses. The Zoning Ordinance may split this
classification into two categories: Rural Residential, to be applied to the Canon Manor, and Estate
Residential, which would be applied to the Southeast Specific Plan Area and other areas with this
designation.
Low Density
Single - family residential development at density of 4.0 to 6.0 units per gross acre. Typical lots
would be 6,000 square feet, but the minimum would be 5,000 square feet, and the Zoning
Ordinance may permit smaller lots (4,500 square feet) for projects that use features such as
clustering and common open space that may result. in somewhat smaller lots, but increased
2 -20
Rohnert Park General Plan
2.3 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
Table 2.3 -1 shows the buildout acreage of the General Plan Diagram. Approximately '-W 1,364
net acres would be developed within the UGB, including infill sites. An additional 50 acres
would be developed for community fields outside the UGB. The table breaks out acreage by area
of the city: areas inside the 1999 City limits and three areas outside the 1999 City limits, the east -
side (north of the SSU campus), Canon Manor and southeast (south of the SSU campus), and the
westside (west of Dowdell Avenue).. Most areas that are planned for new development are resi-
dential in use, totaling about 62-0 640 acres. Amendments to the General Plan in 2010 have re-
sulted in the designation of certain developed and undeveloped lands from an industrial designa-
tion to mixed use and parks /open space. An additional 550 acres outside the UGB and inside the
SOI would be used for parks and open space. Figure 2.3 -1 compares land uses in 1999 to those
resulting from full buildout of the General Plan.
Table 2.3 -1:
General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development
Inside 1999 Eastside Canon Manor-
Westside
Sonoma
City Limits & Southeast
Mountain
Village
Residential
Estate 0 60 204240
0
03
Low Density 0 140 6470
0
03
Medium Density 0 60 2720
0
03
High Density 0 40 0
45
03
Mixed Use 20 � 30 74-0
0
147
Commercial 40 0 0
601
03
Industrial 120 0 0
55
03
Office 10 0 0
20
03
Public/Institutional 0 10 0
0
1
Parks /Open Space2 2 155 1738
3
27
Total 192 495 319 348
183
175
L /nduda<24aawinthe K*ed/Dowd 1spe &pknama
2 lndudesnV5boihoodpvAx Inearpwk; wnm ni[y> e1d_•, andaeekcumdas The wmmrnV&kfs (4Wrww=*S0aaes),
arelocatedinside ibe Sphere ofbafumM but outside the L#tun Grow& Boundry
3. Various residential commercial ofce and industrial uses are proposed to be integrated throughout
the
Sonoma Mountain Village Planned Development and such uses are therefore collectively reflected as mixed use in
this Table.
4 Assumes Canon Manorindudes 188aaes ofEstate Residential. 42acres ofLowQ&wiryResidentia/.
and 9aovs of
0944 /Q s�ce
Note • Thos tabk wforokmndanalpwposes ony and doesnotrepresevtadopmd CAypoicyrekted to buydaut Totd&dooutof
the Ga7eralPlansnedmraqwmwdbynorspmWin the GawralAim
Source: Dyett & Bhada
6Rev-06f - ftgev. Oct 20101
2 -24
Rohnert Park General Plan
A minimum of 2 to 4 acres of parkland is provided, either in the Specific Plan
area, or immediately adjacent open space areas to the west.
Southeast Specific Plan Area
LU -22 Require preparation of a Specific Plan prior to approval of any development in the
southeast area.
The Specific Plan shall include a neighborhood park approximately five to eight acres in
size, as specified in OS -12. Development shall be in accordance with the development
program outlined in Table 2.4 -3.
Table 2.43:
Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area
rox Grow
rox- Housing L hAY AWrox Nan-resfden"
Acreae
BuildngArea (1,000if.)
Rural / Estate Residential 15-2022-28
25-3030-5
Low Density Residential 20-2228-32-
125 -130 145 -165
Medium Density Residential 26-29 48-R
230-240180
Mixed -Use Development 5-1010-14
80-9055-75 10 i
Gpen 4-5
Public /Institutional <1
Parks 5-8
Total 40+80
475 Max-41065' A 10
2-) (Rev. Oct 20101
LU -23 Permit neighborhood- oriented retail, offices, financial, business and personal services,
and other similar neighborhood - compatible uses.
LU -24 Permit a maximum FAR of 0.4 for retail -only development, and 1.0 for mixed use
development. Only land devoted to non- residential uses shall be counted towards
establishing the non - residential FAR requirements.
LU -25 Only land deve�ed �e iian FesidewW uses shall be eeunted es�abhshiffg �he nen
ozeside:: W M •cquir_.v _ni . Allow residential uses in the mixed use area as long as
they do not front Bodway Parkway.
LU -26 Allow the Mixed Use area to be developed with a mix of residential and commercial .
uses, or with either one of those uses without the other.
Northeast Specific Plan Area
LU -27 Require preparation of a Specific Plan prior to approval of any development in the
Northeast area.
2 -38
0 1.000 2000 /.OW
-°°°- &,hncrt park City Lbnits
^ ^• °• sphere of Influcnac
RD
20 Year Urban Crowd, Wxrndarr Figure 2.5 -2
Urban Growth Boundary and
Annexation Area
Diagram Revisions:
9117110
Chapter 3: Community Design
Views
CD-4 Designate Petaluma Hill Road as a scenic corridor throughout its stretch along Rohnert Park.
CD -5 Ensure that any landscape treatment along Petaluma Hill Road does not obstruct views
of the eastern ridgelines from the street.
Because there are few trees along Petaluma Hill Road north of SSU, the street provides
uninterrupted views of the eastern and northern ridgelines. This visual quality of the
street should be maintained by discouraging street planting on the eastern edge of the
street, except in the general areas of the creeks.
CD -6 As part of any development along Petaluma Hill Road, ensure planting, if any, does not
obstruct views of the ridges from the city's eastern neighborhoods. In no case shall trees
or shrubs that exceed 25 feet in height upon maturity be used.
A maximum height of 25 feet will permit views of the ridgelines above 1,000 foot
elevation from a horizontal distance of about 1,000 feet from the open space edge. If
trees are taller, views of the ridgelines from the eastern neighborhoods will be disrupted..
Site specific characteristics may necessitate heights shorter than 25 feet or no planting at
all to ensure that views are preserved.
CD -7 Minimize disruption of existing views by new development.
• Along Snyder Lane:
- Provide an approximately 32 -foot wide linear park/parkway (within the
currently acquired right -of -way, which is not needed for street parking; see
Chapter 4: Transportation) along the eastern edge of Snyder Lane as a
neighborhood amenity and to provide primarily unobstructed views of the
ridgeline (see Figure 3.14);
— Set back all development on the eastside at least 20 feet from the edge of the
linear parkway (that is, approximately 52 feet from the street curb). Establish
upper -story step -back requirements for development adjacent to the parkway
as part of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Along the 1999 City limits, in the area between Creekside Middle School and
Rancho Cotati Senior High School, set back new structures at least 60 feet away
from the edge of existing residential-use parcels immediately adjacent to the west.
• Maintain a 100 -foot setback between the "G" section and any new development
located south of it.
• Along Bodway PadewayPetaluma Hill Road, north of Valley House Drive,
require any new development on the °e-- western side of the street, w#
exeeptien of the Mixed Use eenter-, to be set back at least 50 feet from the edge of
the street right -of -way.
Figure 3.1 -3 shows an illustrative simulation of new development along Snyder Lane.
See policy CD -49, pertaining to setback requirements for the Mixed Use center.
3 -II
dam"Coft" ftC
�.��. Major Arterial (4 -6 lanes)
Minor Arterial (2 lanes)
® ®� -• Major Collector (4 lanes)
- - v Minor Collector (2 lanes)
Ul'f.TT Y IS 11 A'f IA
W ..n .n1 I�{re.l Ii. n.•...
- - - - - -• Sphere of Influence
20 -Year Urban Growth Boundary
Figure 4.1 -1
Master Street Plan
(Rev. Oct 2010)
Chapter 4. Transportation
Table 4.1-4:
Roadway ImDrovements
Segment
From
To
Improvement
Ing1l
(widen to 4 lanes)
Rohnert Park Expwy
Commerce Blvd
Redwood Dr
Widen to 6 lanes
US 101
(widen to 4 lanes)
US 101 Crossing
State Farm Dr
Business Park Dr
New Minor Arterial
US 101 Underpass
Golf Course Dr
Wilfred Dr
New Major Arterial
Snyder Ln
Southwest Blvd
Hinebaugh Creek
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Seed Farm Dr Enterprise Dr Rohnert Park Expwy New Minor Collector
Commerce Blvd
Copeland Creek
Arlen Dr
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Golf Course Dr
Fairway Dr
Country Club Dr
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
amide
Snyder Ln
North side of
South side of G
Upgrade to Major Arterial
Creekside Middle
Section
(widen to 4 lanes)
School
Neighborhood
Rohnert Park Expwy
Snyder Ln
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Petaluma Hill Rd
1,500 feet north of
Railroad Avenue
Upgrade with intersection
Keiser Ave
improvements and turn lanes
(remains as 2 lanes, with
designation as Minor Arterial).
Eleanor Ave
1999 City Limits
Rohnert Park Expwy
New Minor Collector
Keiser Ave
Snyder Ln
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Minor Arterial or
Major Collector
New Linear Park Rd
Eleanor Rd
North side of SSU
New Minor Collector
Canon Manor and Soudk%W
East Cotati Ave
Bodway Pkwy
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Valley House Dr
Bodway Pkwy
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Bodway Pkwy
Camino Collegio
Railroad Ave
New Major Collector
Alice Dr
✓tHP�elfBRt i3�
Bodway Pkwy
Vel4ey Heuse Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
East Getato Aye
Upgrade to Minor Collector
Upgrade to Miner Gelleeter
(north of A liee -Br )
New Minor Ge"ecter
(seatl -,fice Btu
4 -15
�o Class I Bike Path
..... Gass I Bike Path (proposed)
Class II Bike Path
acaeeae¢e Class II Bike Path (proposed)
Class III Bike Path
Ul'GiT � IeHAI'IA
Parks
Schools
------• Sphere of Influence
F" .._ .' 20 -Year Urban Growth Boundary
Figure 4.4 -1
Bicycle System
(Rev. Oct 2010)
Schools & Community Centers -- ----• Sphere of Influence
20 -Year Urban Growth Boundary
Parks
Open Space - Environmental Conservation
IMIT s 0HA11A
Figure 5.2 -1
Parks and Schools
(Rev. Oct 2010)
Chapter 9.• Housing
Table 9.5 -2:
Potential Residential Development — Outside of City Limits (within Sphere of Influence)
Source. City of Rohnert Park Community Development Department, 2009.
9 -65
Rea /istic
� r�r5 ,S,Oh
SIt� E` ;
A ro ved/
PP
specifIc
„
General Plan
Unit
� �i � �;
n {� t�
Infrastructure
r
Constructed/
Zoning
Desigation
Capacty
Capacity (Y /N)/�;
Potential)
P /an
, .
1
/Estate,
��j �
_'�
Low Density,
,r,Y�R
9i "< `
N
fill �b3x
Y�� [. �'Y �Yr� ?4.:.3
i £K' alrr• C'4Y+ Nh'�t k
SPrl$�
N h�l},�f` ✓ 1 S 3 r t
a5 �' S y�. i
Medium
�i "y.+(��'1 # k.
,}& A 1
�zirV�fi
j %f� r'Rr� k Ny �'r rt �si
y S' fF 4`°4
zN t4
t
i Y y 1.
r
Density
475
RA
,
�T1 1 x
SP
x+ d , it+Ysk
� " .
��
��I `>
Southeast
Residential f
and Mixed-
Fr
�” �
N
N �
� �
}�'�4i��v���
y
i�14 ",
t� }�'
a�' �i�1- #, }q�,�Fi.�.
�
5��•4x �yf41.'�91��jvt 1p
y��
Use
d��Y+�2,
1'�'i �y ui ���
{ YIh+��J
To
4 65
�.M5 ?M ;
x
�R ,m... ,.2f
Source. City of Rohnert Park Community Development Department, 2009.
9 -65
Chapter 9: Housing
SauihefflSpecl cPlazrArea
The General Plan Diagram provides for approximately 64 -5 -10 acres of mixed -use development,
which could result in the development of approximately M.40 -90 units, � 20 -22 acres of Low
Density Residential, and 344 -26 -29 acres of Medium Density Residential in the Southeast Specific
Plan Area. The Southeast Area also includes about 4-6-15 -20 acres of Rural Estate Residential land.
A higher floor ratio would be allowed for a mixed -use area if it were to include residential
development as part of commercial structures (1.0 as opposed to 0.4) to encourage the development
of housing in this area.
A total of 475 units are proposed for the Southeast area, X1.72 of which would be affordable per the
City's 15 percent inclusionary housing ordinance.
Northwest Specific Plan Area
Approximately 800 to 900 High Density Residential units could be constructed on almost 50
residentially - designated acres in the Northwest Specific Plan Area, developed on either side of the
Wilfred Avenue extension.
Community Design Element Policies CD-44 and CD-47 are designed to ensure that residential
developments are designed to capitalize on views of the surrounding separator to the west and
north, and beyond, and that adjacent commercial areas are compatible with the residential uses.
A total of 900 units are proposed for the Northeast area, .135 of which would be affordable per the
City's 15 percent inclusionary housing ordinance.
Timing of Development
General Plan buildout is envisioned to occur by 2020, at an average growth rate of 225 housing
units per year. The actual timing of development will depend on a number of factors, including:
• Market demand for housing
• Preparation and approval of specific plans
• Availability of water and wastewater disposal services, and
• Annexation approval.
AGENCY AND FUNDING RESOURCES
Agencies and programs that address housing needs within the City of Rohnert Park are already in
place.
Community Development Commission
State law authorizes local governments to establish one or more redevelopment project areas to
eliminate blight, and to expand and improve the supply of low and moderate- income housing.
Redevelopment agencies may use the power of eminent domain to assemble and acquire sites for
housing, both within and outside of a project area. They may also issue revenue bonds to finance
infrastructure and provide long -term, low- interest loans for construction and rehabilitation.
Additionally, funds may be generated by tax increment financing, which captures for a time, all or a
portion of the increased tax revenue that results from greater private investment in a project area.
9 -67
Afford"
0dw
TOW
41
City Urnks
L j Sphere of Influence
Appendix C:
Rohnert Park Housing Sites
71
Ii
bzugli
0 OLS I
Rohn Park NoWng Skes. Dyea and Maim 200%
T Cky, Coumy, and Street Sm Data, Cky of Rohnert Pak, 2008.
(Rev. Oct 2010)