2007/04/10 City Council Resolution 2007-53RESOLUTION NO. 2007-53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AND EIP (A DIVISION OF PBS & J) FOR THE
PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
SONOMA MOUNTAIN VILLAGE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park solicited proposals to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village Project pursuant to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
WHEREAS, the City has received and reviewed a proposal to prepare the EIR for
Sonoma Mountain Village from EIP (a division of PBS & J) to complete the EIR document as
required;
WHEREAS, the proponents for the Sonoma Mountain Village Project are responsible
for funding the required EIR work per the proposal and for providing an administrative fee to the
City equal to 20 percent of the contract price for the EIR work;
WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized the City Manager to execute agreements
with the fines listed in the approved environmental consultant list;
WHEREAS, Staff has prepared an Agreement for Services between the City of Rohnert
Park and EIP (a division of PBS & J) regarding the preparation of the EIR for the Sonoma
Mountain Village Project;
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park has reviewed and considered
the information contained in the Staff Report and all relevant materials regarding the Agreement
of Services between the City of Rohnert Park and EIP (a division of PBS & J).
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby approve
said Agreement of Services.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to
execute this agreement in substantially similar form to the attached agreement for and on behalf
of the City of Rohnert Park.
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 10th day of April, 2007.
CITY OF ROHNERT -'ARK
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
This Agreement is made and entered into on this date,
by and between the City of Rohnert Park, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and EIP (a
division of PBS & J), hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant."
WHEREAS, the City requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report to be
prepared by outside consultants pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act;
and
WHEREAS, the Consultant is qualified and experienced to provide such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, said City and said Consultant for the considerations hereinafter set
forth, mutually agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF WORK. Consultant shall perform those services described in the Proposed
Project Role of EIR Consultant Technical Expertise and Issues Analysis, Work Program and
Deliverables, Schedule, and Appendices, attached as Exhibit "A" within the time frames stated
therein.
2. COORDINATION. Consultant shall assign Ted Adams, Senior Project Manager,
to personally participate in said project and to coordinate the activities of the Consultant.
3. COMPENSATION.
A. City shall pay Consultant as compensation in full for such services and
expenses at the rates set forth in the Standard Hourly Rates and Costs attached as Exhibit "B," the
total sum not to exceed - $400,423 (Four hundred thousand, four hundred and twenty -three
dollars). Progress payments will be tied to completion of tasks so all payments are proportional
to the work completed. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of
defects, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment.
B. Consultant shall submit itemized monthly statements for work performed.
City shall make any payment due within thirty (30) days after approval of the invoice by City.
Payment will be made for the approved amount of the invoice minus ten (10) percent. The ten
(10) percent retained by City will be held until 30 days after final completion and acceptance of
the contract work.
C. Payments due and payable to Consultant for current services are within the
current budget and within an available, unexhausted and unencumbered appropriation of the City.
In the event the City has not appropriated sufficient funds for payment of Consultant services
beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover only those costs incurred up to the
conclusion of the current fiscal year; payment for additional work is conditional upon future City
appropriation.
t
N:AMaureen \Environitientat Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & E[P ContractASo Mtn Village.Aaroement for Services. Final_DOC
4. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its execution until
the completion of the work contemplated by this Agreement and its final acceptance by City
unless terminated earlier as provided herein.
5. NOTICES. All notices, bills, and payments shall be made in writing and may be
given by personal delivery or by mail. Notices, bills and payments sent by mail should be
addressed as follows:
TO CITY: DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
6750 COMMERCE BLVD.
ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928
TO CONSULTANT: TED ADAMS - PROJECT MANAGER
EIP ASSOCIATES (DIVISION OF PSB &J)
353 SACRAMENTO STREET, #1000
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
and when so addressed, shall be deemed given upon deposit in the United States mail, postage
prepaid. In all other instances, notices, bills and payments shall be deemed given at the time of
actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names and addresses of the person to whom
notices, bills and payments are to be given by giving notice pursuant to this Paragraph.
6. AMENDMENT OF SCOPE OF WORK. City shall have the right to amend the
Scope of Work within the Agreement by written notification to the Consultant. In such event, the
compensation and time of performance shall be subject to renegotiation upon written demand of
either party to the Agreement. Failure of the Consultant to secure City's written authorization for
extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the contract
price or time due, whether by way of compensation, restitution, quantum merit, etc. for work
done without the appropriate City authorization.
7. CITY'S RIGHT TO TERMINATE /SUSPEND CONTRACT. At any time and
for any or no reason, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, take possession of the
Consultant's work, e.g., studies, preliminary drawings, computations, specifications, etc., insofar
as they are complete and acceptable to the City, and pay the Consultant such equitable proportion
of the total remuneration as the work satisfactorily done by the Consultant at the time of such
discontinuance bears to the whole of the work required to be done by the Consultant under the
terms of this Agreement.
8. CORRECTION OF WORK. The performance of services or acceptance of
information furnished by Consultant shall not relieve the Consultant from obligation to correct
any defective, inaccurate or incomplete work subsequently discovered and all such work shall be
remedied by the Consultant on demand without cost to the City.
9. DELAYS AND EXTENSIONS. The Consultant will be granted time extensions
for delays beyond the Consultant's control. Time extensions will be equal to the length of the
delay or as otherwise agreed upon between the Consultant and the City. In such event,
compensation as set forth in the Scope of Work shall be subject to renegotiation upon written
demand of either parry to the Agreement.
10_ RECORDS OF PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall maintain any ledgers, books
of account, invoices, Vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or
relating to charges for services, or expenditures and disbursements charged to City for a
minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law make these records
2
N:AMaureenAEnvironmental Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn VillageARFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village.Agreement for Services. Flnal,.DOC
available for inspection, audit, and copying by the City. All data, documents, discussions, or
other information developed or received by or for Consultant in performance of this Agreement
are confidential and not be disclosed to any person except as authorized by City or as required by
law.
11. SUBCONTRACTING. None of the services covered by this contract shall be
subcontracted without the prior written consent of the City. In accordance with Government
Code Section 7550, Consultant agrees to state in a separate section of any filed report the
numbers and dollars amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to preparation of the
report.
12. ASSIGNMENT. The Agreement shall not be assigned by the Consultant in whole
or in part, without the written consent of the City.
13. INDEMNIFICATION. To the full extent permitted by law, Consultant shall
indemnify, hold harmless, City, its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all
actions, claims, demands, damages, disability, losses, expenses including attorney's fees and
other defense costs and liabilities of any nature that may be asserted by any person or entity
including Consultant, in whole or in part, arising out of Consultant's activities hereunder,
including the activities of other persons employed or utilized by Consultant in the performance of
this Agreement (including design defects and regardless of City's approval, use or acceptance of
the work or work product hereunder), to the extent caused by the Consultant's negligence,
recklessness or willful misconduct, excepting liabilities due to the negligence or willful
misconduct of the City. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any
limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Consultant under
Worker's Compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts or the terms, applicability or
limitations of any insurance held or provided by Consultant and shall continue to bind the parties
after termination/completion of this Agreement.
14. INSURANCE. Without limiting consultant's indemnification provided herein,
Consultant shall comply with the requirements set forth in Exhibit "C" to this Agreement.
15. STANDARD OF CARE. City relies upon the professional ability of Consultant
as a material inducement to entering into this Agreement. Consultant agrees to use reasonable
care and diligence in its profession in rendering services under this Agreement. Consultant
agrees that the acceptance of his work by City shall not operate as a waiver or release of said
obligation of Consultant. The absence, omission, or failure to include in this Agreement, items
which are normally considered to be a part of generally accepted professional procedure or which
involve professional judgment shall not be used as a basis for submission of inadequate work or
incomplete performance.
16. LITIGATION SUPPORT. Consultant agrees to testify at City's request if
litigation is brought against City in connection with Consultant's report. Unless the action is
brought by Consultant or is based upon Consultant's negligence, City will compensate Consultant
for the preparation and testimony at Consultant's standard hourly rates, if requested by City and
not part of the litigation brought by City against Consultant. .
17. _COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES. The Consultant warrants that he
has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working
for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay
any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage,
brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or
making this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to
annul this Agreement without liability, or, in its discretion to deduct from the Agreement price or
3
N: \Maureen \Envirorunental Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & E[P Contract \So Mtn Village. Agreement for Services. Flnal..DOC
consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage,
brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.
18. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Consultant (including principals, associates, and
professional employees) covenants and represents that it does not now have any investment or
interest in real property and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in the area covered
by this contract or any other source of income, interest in real property or investment which
would be affected in any manner or degree by the performance of Consultant's services
hereunder. Consultant further covenants and represents that in the performance of its duties
hereunder no person having any such interest shall perform any services under this Agreement.
19. STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST. If City determines Consultant
comes within the definition of Consultant under the Political Reform Act (Government Code
§87100), Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under
this Agreement to complete and file a "Statement of Economic Interest" with the Clerk of the
City of Rohnert Park disclosing Consultant and /or such other person's financial interests.
20. MERGER. This Agreement shall constitute the entire Agreement between the
parties and shall supersede any previous agreements, whether verbal or written, concerning the
same subject matter. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until
evidence by a writing is signed by both parties.
21. DEFAULT. If .Consultant should fail to perform any of his obligations hereunder,
within the time and in the manner herein provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this
Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement by giving Consultant written notice of such
termination, stating the reason for such termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to
receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred hereunder,
an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fees specified in the agreement as the services
satisfactorily rendered hereunder by Consultant bear to the total services otherwise required to be
performed for such total fee; provided, however, that the City shall deduct from such amount the
amount of damage, if any, sustained by City by virtue of the breach of the Agreement by
Consultant.
22. NO WAIVER OF BREACH TIME. The waiver by City of any breach of any
term or promise contained in this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term or
provision or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term or promise contained in this
Agreement. Time is of the essence in carrying out the duties hereunder.
23. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be
construed to create and the parties do not intend to create any rights in third parties.
24. ATTORNEY FEES, APPLICABLE LAW AND FORUM. In the event either
party brings an action or proceeding for damages arising out of the other's performance under
this Agreement or to establish the right or remedy of either party, the prevailing parry shall be
entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees and costs as part of such action or proceeding,
whether or not such action or proceeding is prosecuted to judgment. This Agreement shall be
construed and interpreted according to California law, and any action to enforce the terms of this
Agreement or for the breach thereof shall be brought and tried in the County of Sonoma.
25. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The parties intend that Consultant, in
performing the services specified herein, shall act as an independent contractor and shall have
control of the work and the manner in which it is performed. Consultant is not to be considered
an agent or employee of the City and is not entitled to participate in any pension plan, insurance,
bonus or similar benefits City provides its employees. In the event City exercises its right to
4
N: \Maureen \Enviromnental Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
terminate this Agreement, Consultant expressly agrees that he /she shall have no recourse nor
right of appeal under rules, regulations, ordinances or laws applicable to employees.
26. TAXES. Consultant agrees to file tax returns and pay all applicable taxes on
amounts paid pursuant to this Agreement and shall be solely liable and responsible to pay such
taxes and other obligations, including, but not limited to, state and federal income and FICA
taxes. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any liability which it may
incur to the United States for to the State of California as a consequence of Consultant's failure to
pay, when due, all such taxes and obligations.
27. EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES. Consultant shall not discriminate in its
performance under the Agreement either directly or indirectly on the grounds of race, color,
religion, sex, age, national, origin, or other prohibited grounds in its employment practices, and
shall take affirmative steps to ensure that applicants are employed and employees are treated
during employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, or other prohibited
grounds.
28. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW. Consultant shall comply with all applicable
federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations affecting the Consultant and his /her work
hereunder. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant has all licenses, permits,
qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to
practice Consultant's profession and to do the work hereunder. Consultant represents and
warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times
during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required.
for Consultant to practice his /her profession and do the work contemplated by this Agreement.
29. TITLE TO DOCUMENTS. Title to all plans, specifications, maps, estimates,
reports, manuscripts, drawings, descriptions and other final work products compiled by the
Consultant under the Agreement shall be vested in the City, none of which shall be used in any
manner whatsoever, by any person, firm, corporation, or agency without the expressed written
consent of the City. Basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations, and other data
prepared or obtained under the Agreement shall be made available, upon request, to the City
without restriction or limitations on their use. Consultant shall not be liable in any way for the
unapproved use, re -use, or modification of the deliverables or other documents of service without
the Consultant's express written authorization. Consultant may retain copies of the above -
described information but agrees not to disclose or discuss any information gathered, discussed or
generated in any way through this Agreement without the written permission of City during the
term of this Agreement or until ninety (90) days after receipt of final payment from City.
30. INTERPRETATION. Notwithstanding the fact that one or more provisions of
this Agreement may have been drafted by one of the parties to this Agreement, such provisions
shall be interpreted as though they were a product of a joint drafting effort and no provisions shall
be interpreted against a party on the ground that said party was solely or primarily responsible for
drafting the language to be interpreted.
31. EXECUTION. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall constitute one and the same instrument and shall become binding upon the parties
when at least one copy hereof shall have been signed by both parties hereto. In approving this
Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart.
32. AUTHORITY. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the
parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of
such parry and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.
5
NAMaureen\Enviroamental Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village\RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village. Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK: CONSULTANT:
By: /
Name: (Date)
Title: Mayor
Per Resolution No. adopted
by the City Council on
ATTEST:
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
n j 2
if'�,sU'.'ll� 9. ;L�i�
Pity Attorney
By: /_
Name: Rodney Jeung (Date)
Title: Associate Vice President
6
N:\ Maureen \Environmental Studies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
- Proposed Project, Role of EIR Consultant, Technical Expertise and Issues Analysis,
Work Program and Deliverables, Schedule, Cost, and Appendices
7
N: \Maureen \Environmental Smdies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & E[P Contract \So Mtn Viliage.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
t .,_ .
�'.��.t S' ; ' .:3.3137„ - �xsl c'3. �z .'i V 1.....2,- ..i:;��.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
EJ
Proposed
Project
The City of Rohnert Park, Planning Department,
is requesting proposals for the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed
Sonoma Mountain Village Planned Development
Project ( "Project "). The primary objective of the City
is to have an EIR prepared in full compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and all applicable local, state, and federal regulations
of agencies having jurisdiction over environmental
resources and use of the project site.
Codding Enterprises has submitted to the City of
Rohnert Park Planning Department a proposed Final
Development Plan (Revised November 22, 2006),
prepared for the project. The project site is located at
the southwest corner of Bodway Parkway and Camino
Colegio, encompassing an area of about 175 acres.
About 150 acres of the project site are within the
City Lunus. Site development plans exclude an area
of 25 acres on the southern portion of the property
Which falls within the jurisdiction of Sonoma County,
portions of which are proposed for site infrastructure
needs separate from the remaining site area proposed
for development.
According to the Final Development Plan, the project
includes a maximum of 1,892 residential units,
300,250 square feet of office space, 35,000 square
feet of civic building use, 211,500 square feet of
retail space, 40,000 square feet of grocery space, and
a 25,000 square foot theater. The project includes
adaptive reuse of 700,000 square foot industrial campus
building space that previously housed the operations of
Agilent Technologies (Hewlett-Packard). Therefore, a
key component of the project is the adaptive reuse of
existing buildings -- a mix ofoffice, retail and residential
uses are planned for building reuse.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS,
REZONING
The Project includes a request for specified General
Plan Amendments, Rezoning and approval of a Final
Development Plan. The General Plan Amendments
include graphic and text changes including but not
limited to:
■ Figure 2.2 -1, General Plan Diagram: a change
in the site designation from Industrial" to
"Mixed Use ", "Public /lnstutuional ", and "Parks/
Recreation" in accordance with the Development
Plan, or other designation as considered
approprtate.
Proposed Project
D+ 11) -) -`'= 0 AY
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact- Report ( .IR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
• Table 2.2 -1, Standards for Density and
Development Intensity: the addition of
information that Floor Area Ratios do not apply
to the Sonoma Mountain Village Project.
• Mixed Use narrative on page 2 -22: a revision
to the types of land uses that may be allowed in
Sonoma Mountain Village (a full matrix of these
amendments is planned for submittal)
• Figure 2.2 -1, General Plan Diagram, and Figure
4.1 -1, Master Street Plan: a modification to
Bodway Parkway from a 4 -lane Collector to a 2-
lane Collector on the east side of the project site.
• Figure 4.4 -1, Bicycle System, the addition of a
Class 1 bike lane to the southern portion of
Bodway Parkway; and
• Figure 5.2 -1, Parks and Schools: a revision to
show new project parks (the park requirement
is 28 acres, the proposed Development Plan
provides for about 29 acres of parks).
In order to maintain consistency with the amended
General Plan, the project includes a proposal to
Rezone the project site from "I -L" (Limited Industrial)
to "P -D" (Planned Development). The zoning to be
"form- based" (similar to a SmartCode) that establishes
development procedures and standards by zone (Zones
T3 through T6 plus CS, CP and CB).
Based on the proposed General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning, the Development Plan specifies how and
where specific land use types may be developed on the
project property. The Development Plan establishes the
P -D Zoning district and describes the nature, character
and location of all development within the property.
The Development Plan is to provide a framework for
preparation of the EIR under CEQA. It is noted that
a Preliminary Development Plan was approved by the
Planning Commission on May 11, 2006 and is filed
under application No. P12005- 047PD.
While there are no Tentative Map applications at this
time, it is envisioned that maps will be submitted in the
future as phased elements of the project as a whole.
18 Proposed Project
D4:1093.97:0307
. roposal to Preparre an Envi.roaarne.ritol Iinp act Report ( IR) for the Patterson Ranch Planned District
Key Issues.
Based om 1) site inspection, 2) review of the project
information submitted by the project applicant,
inclusive of the Final Development Plan Text,
SmartCode P -D Zoning District and supporting maps,
and 3) our experience in preparing the EIR for the
Southeast Specific Plan project directly east of the
Sonoma Mountain Village project site, EIP /PBS &J
expects all of the topical issues as noted in the CEQA
Guidelines Appendix G (Environmental Checklist
Form), to be of critical interest during the course of
environmental review_ However, in the interest of
highlighting specific environmental issues among those
anticipated to receive close scrutiny, the following points
are noted (refer also to the discussion in Section 6 of this
proposal, Technical Expertise and Issues Analysis,
regarding a discussion all subject areas):
AESTHETICS AND URBAN DESIGN
Petaluma Hill Road is listed as a Scenic Corridor in
the Sonoma County General Plan. This scenic status
is to be protected. Much of the Sonoma Mountain
Village project site is visible from portions of Petaluma
I fill Road. The site is visible from Valley House Drive
and Bodway Parkway. The extent of the development
on the project site may or may not affect the Scenic
Corridor from Petaluma Hill Road will need to be
assessed. The visual analysis will need to address
the effect project development would have on views
from both on and off the site, including adjacent
residential areas locations at locations identified as
sensitive to visual change. To assist in this process,
optional photomontages are proposed as part of the
EIP /PBS &J work program to fully assess visual and
aesthetic concerns regarding the project.
AIR QUALITY
Asa large development, the project could be a significa± 1 t
source of air pollutants. However, many aspects of its
design (i.e., densely developed site plan, mixture of
commercial and residential uses, allowance for mass
transit access and bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
energy - efficient building design, etc.) are identified in
the Bay Area regional air quality plan as key strategies
for emission reduction and air quality standard
attainment The analysis of project construction and
operational air quality impacts will reflect these key
design features and will rely on the methodologies and
significance thresholds that are documented in the
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The California tiger salamander is known to frequent
the general area. The species is listed as a federally
endangered species in the area. Critical habitat has not
been designated for the Sonoma County population
because it was considered "detrimental" to the
development of the Santa Rosa Plain Conservation
Strategy. Also, wetlands subject to potential jurisdiction
of the Army Corps of Engineers are indicated in the
Development Plan text and shown on the drawings.
Key Issues 19
D4:1093.97:0307
proposal to Prepare an Enviror-tsnental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mourntain Village
The City's General Plan identifies biological resources
occurring or potentially occurring in the planning
area, including wetlands, vernal pools, rare plants
and wildlife and special- status plants and wildlife.
The project sponsor's planned biological and natural
resource surveys for the project are being offered to
supplement the General Plan resource assessments
with site - specific observations, and a preliminary
assessment of wetlands and waterways. The project
applicant plans to continue the studies to measure and
map such features throughout the 2006/2007 rainy
season, provide a delineation of waters of the United
States, including wetlands, and determine the potential
presence of special- status plant and wildlife species,
and habitat types and locations.
Also, the project applicant plans to complete a Natural
Resources Conservation and Management Program
for the preservation and enhancement of onsite and
offsite natural resources in coordination with the
appropriate resources agencies and create standards
for the conservation development and use of natural
resources at the project site. Although not confirmed
at this point in time, it is assumed these study materials
will be made available to the EIR consultant team for
informational purposes, consideration and peer review
as necessary.
As was noted for the Southeast Specific Plan project,
development within the Sonoma Mountain Village
area could lead to the loss of grassland habitat that
is important to foraging by birds of prey considered
special status species. Special status species are those
meeting the criteria in CEQA Section 15380 and
include species listed as threatened, endangered, or
proposed for listing, and species of concern to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife service and California Department
of Fish and Game. This will need to be confirmed
during EIR preparation with mitigation established if
and as necessary.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Stormwater runoff from site development would
increase the demand on drainage facilities and could
affect water quality with respect to natural drainage
ways. As noted in the Development Plan text, Section
IIt, Executive Summary, Item B.4, Standards for Natural
Resources Conservation, the project is planned to
20 Key Issues
D4: 1093.97:0307
embrace sustainable development practices. Provisions
for the treatment of storm water including bio- swales
and detention areas are planned to be included into the
design of the storm water system. The EIR will need
to consider the capacity of the stormwater conveyance
system, the potential for localized or downstream flood
hazard, and potential pollutant loading in drainage
tributaries:
LAND USE
Much of the 75 -acre project site is undeveloped, with
a complex of at least 700,000 square feet of industrial
campus building space on the site that previously
housed the operations ofAgilent Technologies slated for
adaptive reuse. Because the project would include up
to 1,892 residential units, 300,250 square feet of office
space, 35,000 square feet of civic building use, 211,500
square feet of retail space, 40,000 square feet of grocery
space, and a 25,000 square -foot theater inclusive of
adaptive reuse; land use compatibility issues between
the proposed project site and adjacent properties to the
north, east and west where existing residential uses are
currently located would warrant. careful examination.
Office and commercial uses as proposed would require
an assessment of land use compatibility with respect
to nearby residential development concerning traffic
and circulation, urban design, noise, drainage, public
services and other issues yet to be determined
NOISE
The project would be located on a sparsely developed
rural site surrounded by many older residential uses,
which would introduce the potential for noise impact
from project motor vehicle traffic. There could also -be
on -site noise impacts because of the planned mixture
of land uses of varying noise sensitivity. This potential
will be evaluated using well accepted methodologies
for modeling stationary and mobile source noise
levels. Significance will be determined with respect
to the goals and criteria of the General Plan Noise
Element and other applicable guidance documents.
Noise abatement strategies and design changes will be
suggested where feasible.
Proposal to Prepare an P;nvir•onmencal Impact "Repor=t (FIR) for• the Patterson 1Za.nch. Plannt.ed District
PLANNING POLICY
Based on the Development Plan as submitted, specified
General Plan text and map amendments are identified
with respect to the project as proposed. The CEQA
Guidelines Section 15125 require a discussion of any
inconsistencies between a proposed project and the
applicable General Plan. In addition to describing the
amendments as proposed, itwill be important to identify
any inconsistencies between the goals and policies of
the General Plan and the project as proposed. Because
impact significance'criteria for issues such as land use,
traffic and circulation, visual quality, noise, resource
management and other community characteristics
are closely linked to local planning policy, the EIR
will document consistency of the proposed Sonoma
Mountain Village project with the relevant goals and
policies of the Rohnert Park general Plan adopted
in July, 2000. Where any inconsistencies or partial
consistencies are noted, mitigation will be developed
as necessary to bring the project into compliance with
the goals and policies of the General Plan.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
With up to 1,892 residential units and 611,500 square
feet of commercial /office space, the providers of public
services (police, fire, emergency services, schools, parks
and recreation) and utilities (sewer, water, drainage),
will face increased demand on their services and
facilities. The project's net effects in terms of additional
resources (equipment, infrastructure, personnel)
required to maintain acceptable public service and
utility standards of service will need to be assessed.
Therefore, further investigations into the public
service and utility issues appear warranted. Further,
as noted in the project applicant's Development Plan,
project infrastructure is planned to be implemented as
required to allow for project phasing and the project
is planned to incorporate Green Building Practices
into the project buildings. This data will need to be
included in the analysis of potential impacts to the
providers of public services and utilities.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
Traffic generation and congestion is a recognized
issue throughout the general project area. Based on
our experience in preparing the Sonoma Mountain
Village EIR, the City of Cotati will be expected to
show heightened interest with respect to intersection
and roadway planning within its jurisdiction, and
Caltrans will have questions regarding freeway and
ramp service levels over the long -term: Major streets
in the project area including Petaluma Hi11 Boulevard,
Valley House Drive, Bodway , Parkway,:,. Railroad
Avenue, East Cotati Boulevard, Redwood Highway,
Snyder Lane and others will require afresh. review and
analysis regarding traffic and circulation conditions
resulting from potential growth and development in
the project area. Cumulative development will be
an additional concern to be addressed concerning
traffic and other issues (See Section 6 of this proposal
for additional discussion regarding the approach to
assessing cumulative development issues).
Key Issues 21.
D4: t093.97:0307
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental. Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
IF - I
Role of the
EIR Consultant
Within the context of EIR issues briefly identified
above, EIP /PBS &J fully understands the need for
a comprehensive, thorough, and defensible CEQA
document. To meet the requirements of the Sonoma
Mountain Village Planned Development Project EIR,
EIP /PBS &J's role as the environmental consultant will
emphasize the following:
QUALITY ASSURANCE /PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
To assure the high technical quality of both our
analytical and documentation processes, EIP /PBS &J
maintains a quality assurance /quality control (QA/
QC) program that is applied to all project activities.
The fundamental objectives of the QA /QA program
are to assure not only that our work products fulfill
the scope of work requirements for each task, but also
that the specific and unique needs of the project are
both fully defined and met. All project deliverables
will be reviewed for comprehension, accuracy, and
conformance with the requirements of CEQA and by
the Project Manager as well as by key individual team
members prior to submittal to the City.
Further, EIP /PBS &J believes it is crucial to clearly
identify and document the client's needs, expectations
and issues to be resolved, as well as all products and
services in a detailed work program. The work program
becomes the single most important document defining
the conduct of work and approach /methodology to
be followed in preparing complex environmental
documents. Ted Adams as project manager for the
Sonoma Mountain Village project EIR will use the
work program to monitor the progress of our activities
and ensure that we are performing the work in a
manner mutually agreed to with.City staff.
At the outset of work, EIP /PBS &J's project manager
will conduct a team meeting to describe the project
in detail and outline conduct and procedures of the
work program. City staff will be invited to attend.
A "Project Guide" will be assembled and distributed
to each EIR team member. The "Project Guide' will
serve as a general manual for conducting the work
and will include at a minimum 1) the project Final
Development Plan with maps, 2) a complete project
description, 3) project drawings, 4) staff assignments,
5) staff budgets, 6) a graphic schedule, 7) a description
of the scope of work, 8) the Notice of Preparation
(NOP), 9) agency and public responses to the NOP,
Role of the EIR Consultant 23
D4:109197:0307
Proposal asal to Prepare an E.tiviroa�a iental I .z l act Report (E.IR) for the Patterson Ranch Pla tned. District
and 10) _other documents as necessary to ensure, the
the overall work program and deliverables, outlines
successful startup of EIR preparation and future
the project schedule, presents our cost estimate for
conduct of the work.
preparation of the EIR, and introduces key staff to
participate in EIR preparation. Our proposal concludes
EIP /PBS &J's project manager will monitor schedule
with a discussion of special resources to assist. in EIR
performance for all EIR work tasks each week. Work
preparation, resources-that, are routinely used by EIP /
accomplished to date will be compared to the activities
PBS&J to meet unique or special project challenges.
as indicated on the schedule prepared for the project
-
(see Section 8 of this proposal), and corrections will be
made as necessary to maintain an orderly progression
of the work program. Planned meetings with
Planning Department staff will be scheduled well in
advance and established as milestone events. Toward
this end, a series of internal project team meetings are
proposed to be established at the outset of work to
ensure a systematic cross - sharing of findings and avoid
duplication of effort. Frequent communication is the
best way to manage EIRs and resolve issues respecting
complex projects that involve highly visible and
potentially controversial issues.
Creative Problem Solving: EIP /PBS &J views the
preparation of this EIR as a problem solving process.
Impacts documented during project evaluation will
be treated as areas of investigation warranting special
consideration and treatment in the development of
mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts to
less than significant levels. We will establish mitigation
measures that can reduce impacts and be readily
incorporated into the project design requirements.
Comprehensiveness: The EIR will address every
substantive point .raised in the letters of comment
provided by Responsible Agencies and the public
in response to the Notice of Preparation, and raised
through a planned scoping meeting to be conducted
for the project. Senior staff will review each section of
the document for compliance with CEQA Guidelines,
to assure quality of style and content, to assure
understanding by the layman, and for conformance
with key principles and practices that have evolved
from recent CEQA- related case law.
CONTENTS 'OF PROPOSAL
The following portions of our proposal to prepare the
Sonoma Mountain Village Program EIR discusses the
technical issues to be addressed in the EIR, presents
24 Role of the EIR Consultant
U 4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to Prepare.an Environmental Irnpac€ Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain. Village.
Technica
Expertise &
Issues Analysis
This section presents information about the technical
issues we expect will be addressed in the EIR, and
thus the expertise required to prepare the EIR. This
discussion is subject to refinement based on results
of completion of the Sonoma Mountain Village and
Sonoma Mountain Village Map, the public /agency
scoping process and responses to the Notice of EIR
Preparation. It should be noted that the order of
presentation of EIR technical issues discussed below,
is provided in alphabetical order to be consistent
with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Forrn) and the City's list of Standards of
Impact Significance that are used throughout all EIRs
prepared for the City.
AESTHETICS AND URBAN DESIGN
The Sonoma Mountain Village project site is visible
from adjacent roadway corridors.
Today, the undeveloped portions of the project site
promote a semi -rural quality in the views available
from surrounding roadways and adjacent properties.
Development of the Sonoma Mountain Village site as
would be seen from Petaluma Hill Road, Valley House
Drive and Bodway Parkway would result changed
appearances in the area to a more urban form of
development. Accordingly, this portion of the EIR will
concentrate on the project's effects on visual quality,
urban design and the sense of community character
The Aesthetics and Urban Design analysis will begin
with a thorough description of the physical and visual
characteristics of the Sonoma Mountain Village project
site and area as it currently exists. Photographic
documentation will be used to assist in the description
of existing conditions. The identification of area
characteristics - from a visual standpoint, including
visual access to the Sonoma Mountain Village site
from surrounding locations will establish a framework
for evaluating the potential visual quality impacts of
implementing the project as proposed.
It is noted that Petaluma Hill Road is designated as a
Scenic Corridor in the Sonoma County General Plan,
the scenic status of which is to be protected. Site and
area features that will be documented include:
■ View corridors and existing views of the project
site from important public and private vantage
points, including Petaluma Hill Road and the
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 25
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to .Prepare all Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Patterson Ranch Planned. District
intersection of Valley" House Drive and Bodway
Parkway, and locations from residential viewpoints
in neighborhoods to the north and west of the
project site.
• The architectural style of buildings and land use
elements on adjacent properties and undeveloped
lands that provide a visual context for the Sonoma
Mountain Village project.
• Existing landscaping and street features found in
the area today.
Massing and heights of existing nearby residences
and structures.
It is also noted that Rohnert Park has entered into
an agreement with Sonoma County that establishes
First Priority Areas along Petaluma Hill Road to
mitigate development within the Rohnert Park/Santa
Rosa Community Separator as a result to changes
in the Sphere of Influence (and annexations). The
Agreement specifies that "first priority shall be given
to lands adjacent to the Rohnert Park UGB, lands that
would serve as greenbelt around the city, and view
corridors along Petaluma Hill Road (`first priority
lands')." The visual analysis will address any effect
project development would have on views from both
on and off the Sonoma Mountain Village site and how
the project may or may not affect the potential for the
establishment of a greenbelt area.in the site vicinity.
The visual impact analysis will address the effect project
development would have on views from both on and
off the site at locations identified as sensitive to visual
change. The visual compatibility of the project at
build -out as it relates to adjacent rural and developed
land uses will be examined. At the outset, on- site /off-
site visual relationships will be identified to determine
the degree or intensity of visual interchange.
The analysis will document how the completed
Sonoma Mountain Village project would contribute
to, or determine, the visual meaning or impression one
would gain when viewing and /or traveling through the
area as compared to the image currently perceived. It
is noted that design guidelines for the development
of architectural elements are outlined in the Sonoma
Mountain Village SmartCode P -D Zoning District
Final Development Plan Submittal of November 22,
2006. Building disposition, configuration, function
and density, parking standards, architectural standards,
26 Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis
D4a093.97 :0307
landscape standards, signage standards and other .
elements of project design are specified with respect to
each of the General Urban Transect Zones developed
for the project consistent with SmartCode standards.
Transect zone descriptions, building configurations,
thoroughfare assemblies, public street lighting, and tree
planting plans are established. These features of the
project as presented will be explained and documented
in a clear and understandable fashion to allow the
analysis and presentation of aesthetic and urban design
characteristics and potential impacts.
An analysis of Development Plan conformity will be
provided (see also Relationship to Plans and Planning
Policy described below). Standards of impact
significance will be clearly defined and visual impacts
will be evaluated relevant to:
• Development density, and the effect on existing
views from.public and private areas.
• Contrast and compatibility regarding building
mass, building height, open space and proposed
landscaping
• Compatibility with general City development
standards and guidelines regarding community
design.
■ The potential visual impacts of night lighting
resulting from the project, including streerlights.
Mitigation will include an assessment of potential
methods to establish a compatible tie between proposed
development of the project site at build -out and the
existing surrounding landscape.
In addition, as requested three photo- realistic
photomontages will be prepared for the project. EIP/
PBS &J will collaborate with Planning Department staff
as to the specific locations frorn which to prepare the
photomontages. Several locations have been suggested
by Department staff such as the Sonoma tVloumain
ridgeline, Petaluma Hill Road, adjacent existing
residential areas, and the community separator.
EIP /PBS&J sub- consultant Square One Productions,
under the direction of EIP, will photograph panoramic
views from a series of vantage points to be determined
in consultation with Planning staff and as verified in the
field, that illustrate existing visual conditions. Square
One Productions will then produce 4" x 10" panoramic
check prints from which views for pltototriontaging will
11'roposal.to Prepare an Environmental Impact R.epor €.(.I IR).for the Sonoma Mou.ntairi Village
be selected. Simultaneously, Square One will produce
a 3D model of the Final development Plan rendering in
general massing fashion and with photo- realistic street
trees. Subsequently, Square One will accurately align
the digital 30 images with the respective photographic
images and add roads, as visible; and remove existing
impediments as maybe specified. Proposed structures
will be rendered in a solid- shaded fashion with photo-
realistic trees added. Throughout, Square One will
post progress renderings on their web site, under a
private code. This will allow all project participants to
review the work progress. The web address will be www
squareo ne prod uctions. co m /so nomamo u n tainvilla9e.
Each of the three views will be produced in the form of
computer files suitable for publication purposes, both
as status quo views and as photomontages. Optionally,
Square One will be able to provide larger digital prints,
PowerPoint slides or overhead transparencies.
Data requested to prepare the photomontages includes
Final Development Plan rendering, engineering
survey of site, tree removal plan, street tree plan and
architectural footprints with elevations and sections of.
building prototypes with dimensions.
AIR QUALITY
The US Environmental Protection Agency and
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have
established air quality standards for five major air
pollutants: photochemical oxidants (ozone), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur
dioxide (S02), and small- diameter suspended
particulate matter (PM10 and PM25). In the San
Francisco Bay Area, federal and /or State ozone and
particulate standards are violated on occasion. Many
other chemicals released into the air by transportation,
industrial and other sources are known or suspected
toxic air contaminants (TACs). Much of the
population has a low -level exposure to these TACs
and there is a large and growing body of evidence
linking such exposure to the risk of adverse health
effects. Finally, there is substantial evidence that
carbon dioxide (CO2) and other "greenhouse gases"
emitted from human activities (primarily the burning
of fossil fuels) may be a major driving force behind
accelerating global climate change. With passage of
the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32),
the State has taken an important first step in reducing
California's_ greenhouse gas emissions.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District
( BAAQMD) shares responsibility with the CARB for
ensuring that federal and State standards are achieved
and maintained. in the Bay Area. State law assigns local
air districts the primary responsibility for control of
air pollution from - stationary sources while reserving
to the CARB an oversight function. The BAAQMD
is responsible for regulating stationary sources of
air pollution, monitoring air quality, and air quality
planning activities, including implementation of
transportation control measures. The BAAQMD has
prepared the CEQA Guidelines (December 1999) to
facilitate the review and evaluation of projects in the
Bay Area that are subject to CEQA. This document
provides uniform procedures for assessing potential air
quality impacts, preparing the air quality sections of
environmental documents, and anticipating issues of
concern to the BAAQMD.
The project site does not appear to be close to any
existing large industrial air pollutant sources or
transportation facilities (i.e., Highway 101 passes about
half a mile to the west). But this would not guarantee
that the site would not be significantly affected by
pollutants (Le_, ozone and particulates) transported
to the site by prevailing winds from more distant
sources. The proposed project is a large development
with a mixture of residential, commercial, office and
recreational land uses served by an extensive on -site
road network. As such, it will generate quantities of
air pollutants from its associated stationary, area (i.e.,
energy use, pollutant- containing product use, etc.) and
mobile pollutant sources. Project air quality impacts
and overall consistency with regional air quality plans
will have to be evaluated according to the procedures
specified in the BAAQMD's CEQA Guidelines.
EIP /PBS &J will prepare an EIR air quality analysis
that meets all requirements of the BAAQMD's CEQA
Guidelines. The FIR air quality setting section will
include: I) a description of the climatic and topographic
factors that influence air quality in the Bay Area and on
the project site; 2) identification of the major criteria air
pollutants, TACs and greenhouse gases emitted locally
and regionally; 3) summaries of recent air pollutant
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 27
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Patterson Ra €ich Planned. District
ambient monitoring data; 4) identification of existing
pollutant- sensitive land uses in the site vicinity; and 5)
a listing of applicable air pollution control regulations
and programs currently in place under the Bay Area
Ozone Strategy, Clean Air Plan (2000) and the Global
Warming Solutions Act with particular attention given
to land use/ transportation strategies (e.g., promoting
mixed use and transit - oriented development, etc.) and
greenhouse gas inventory requirements.
The EIR air quality impact analysis will include five
basic components, as detailed below. In all cases,
the methods of analysis and selection of project and
cumulative significance thresholds will rely on the
BAAQMD's CEQA Guidelines and City of Rohnert
Park adopted Thresholds of Significance.
• An analysis of air pollutant impacts during project
constriction phases. The activity (e.g., excavation,
grading, etc.), equipment, and phasing associated
with project construction air pollutant emissions
will be identified. Construction equipment
temporarily emit precursors of ozone (i.e.,
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOx)], but the BAAQMD has included
such emissions in the inventories prepared for the
State- and federally- required air plans and would
not have a significant impact on the attainment
and maintenance of ozone standards. However,
construction activities generate particulate matter
that could affect local air quality if not properly
controlled. BAAQMD- preferred particulate
control strategies will be identified and applied
to project construction activities as appropriate to
phasing and scale.
• An analysis of air pollutant emissions from
operational stationary, area and mobile sources
associated with project development. Estimates
of area source (i.e., building energy use, fireplace/
wood- burning stove, etc.) and motor vehicle
emissions associated with the project will be
prepared using the CARB's URBEMIS model
initialized with project phasing and land use
information provided by the project sponsor,
and with motor vehicle trip rates provided by the
project EIR traffic and circulation analysts.
■ An analysis of local ambient carbon monoxide
(CO) concentrations at sensitive land uses near
major motor vehicle access routes. The potential
of the project and cumulative motor vehicle trips
28 Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis
D4: t093- 97:0307
to cause localized carbon. monoxide "hot spots
will be evaluated near the most severely impacted
intersections and at the locations of sensitive
land uses along major traffic access routes. The
CARB's CALINE4 dispersion model will be used
to estimate the levels of carbon monoxide during
weekday peak conditions under near -term and
long -term cumulative conditions. The modeled
1 -hour and 8 -hour average CO concentrations
will be compared to the state and federal air
quality standards.
■ An analysis of potential emissions and effects of
TACs and greenhouse gases. The potential forTAC
exposure from stationary TAC- emitting facilities
and from diesel- powered motor vehicles will be
evaluated using BAAQMD monitoring data and
land use compatibility specifications given in the
CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook:
A Community Health Perspective. Greenhouse
gas emissions from project motor vehicles and
building energy use will be estimated.
■ An analysis of project consistency with applicable
regional air quality attainment /maintenance
plans. Consistency with regional air quality plans
will be the determining factor in addressing the
projects cumulative impact on regional air quality
(i.e., ozone levels). The BAAQMD assumes that
population /employment growth will be consistent
with the region's General Plans and transportation
plans, and offsets emissions growth by basin -wide
controls on stationary, at and transportation
sources of air pollutants. Projects that are not
consistent with the existing General Plans will
have a significant cumulative impact on regional
air quality unless the additional emissions can be
offset. EIP /PBS &Jwtll estimate the difference in
air pollutant emissions between the development
permitted under current zoning /general plan
and that expected with project under the revised
General plan and the likely effectiveness of
strategies available to mitigate any identified
increase.
EIP /PBS &J will identify strategies for mitigating the
project's construction -phase and operational emissions
of air pollutants using the BAAQMD's CEQA Air
Quality Guidelines as the primary source for such
mitigation strategies; this may include measures such as:
1) phasing /limiting development so that population/
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
employment growth from the project is consistent
with regional air quality planning projections; 2)
implementing sufficient transportation control
measures to offset increases in pollutant emissions
exceeding planning forecasts; and 3) modifying pro-
ject design features to reduce motor vehicle trips,
energy use and greenhouse gas emissions; and 4)
providing adequate buffer zones between pollutant
sources and sensitive land uses.
In 2006, the State Legislature passed AB 32 which
charged CARB to develop regulations on how the
state would address global climate change (also
known as "global warming"). Although there are
currently no published thresholds for measuring the
significance of a project's cumulative contribution
to global climate change, a project participates in
this potential impact through its incremental con-
tribution combined with the cumulative increase of
all other sources of greenhouse gases (GHG). The
approach to this analysis will include presenting an
inventory of GHG (i.e., carbon dioxide, methane,
nitrous oxide) potentially generated by the project
which will be compared to the inventories for So-
noma County and Rohnert Park (as compiled for
the County and Sonoma cities by the Greenhouse
Gas Inventory Project) and for California to the
extent those inventories are available during EIR
preparation. Project compliance with the emission
reduction strategies contained in the California
Climate Action Team's (CCAT) Report to the
Governor and with the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) list of "discrete early action meas-
ures" that is expected to be finalized by July 2007
will be assessed. The Report to the Governor will
propose a path to achieve greenhouse gas reduction
targets.
The CCAT Team is a team of State agencies lead by
the California Environmental Protection Agency.
If a project so complies with the State's strategies to
reduce greenhouse gases to the levels proposed, it
would follow that a project would have a less than
significant cumulative impact to global climate
change. Projects can insure compliance with the
strategies by including vehicle trip reduction meas-
ures, increasing energy efficiency beyond Title 24
requirements, providing multi -modal transportation
options, increased recycling and incorporating green
building technology.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
EIP /PBS &J will address the potential effects of the
proposed Sonoma Mountain Village project on bio-
logical resources present, or potentially present on
the project site. EIP /PBS &J biologists have exten-
sive experience in Sonoma County; and are familiar
with the special - status plants and wildlife of the re-
gion.. Based upon our experience, we anticipate the
following to be key biological resource issues ad-
dressed in the EIR.
• Vernal pool plants - Our previous experiences in
Sonoma County have shown vernal pools to be
a very prominent feature. If present on site,
they will need to be surveyed for special status
plants such as Sebastopol meadowfoam, and
other species listed in the Santa Rosa Plain Ver-
nal Pool Ecosystem Preservation Plan.
• California tiger salamander - The California ti-
ger salamander is known to frequent the general
area. The Sonoma County population is listed
as a federally endangered species. Grassland
habitats in the project area may support aestiva-
tion (hibernation) habitat for this species, and
any seasonal wetlands that may be present on-
site could potentially support California tiger
salamander breeding.
■ Burrowing owl — The proposed project occurs
within the range of the burrowing owl which is
protected by the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty
Act, and is a species of Special Concern with the
California Department of Fish and Game. Bur-
rowing owls are year -round residents in open
grasslands and shrub habitats where they use
small mammal burrows and artificial structures
for nesting and cover. This species may use
grassland habitats in the project area for nesting
and foraging.
Other local issues may include effects to raptors and
other migratory birds (e.g., white - tailed kite, tricol-
ored blackbird, and loggerhead shrike), federally
protected wetlands, and wildlife movement corri-
dors. The following describes the specific steps that
EIP will undertake to accomplish the study of im-
pacts to biological resources at the project site.
First, EIP /PBS &J will conduct background research
to determine what special- status species would be
expected to occur in the Sonoma Mountain Village
project area. This research will include queries of
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 29
Proposal to Prepare 'an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) forthe Sonoma Mountain Village
the California Department of Fish and Game's
Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), the Cali-
fornia Native Plant Society's Online Inventory, and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's online Special-
status Species Database. EIP's knowledge of habitats
and special- status species in Sonoma County, and
any project information provided by the applicant
(to be verified) will be used to focus the list of spe-
cies compiled from the above sources to those most
likely to potentially occur in the project area.
Second, EIP /PBS &J will conduct a reconnaissance
level visit to the project site to identify, or confirm
habitat types. Information on habitats present at the
site will be used to assess the likelihood.that the pro-
ject area supports any of the special- status species
identified through background research described
above. Additionally, a list of plant and wildlife spe-
cies that are observed during the survey will be .
collected for use in preparation of the Biological
Resources section of the EIR for this project. Al --
though no focused special- status species surveys are
included in this scope, any incidental sightings of
special- status species during the survey will be re-
corded for use in the EIR.
During the survey, EIP /PBS &J will also conduct a
wetland assessment to determine if. wetlands or
other waters of the United States that are subject to
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction are pre-
sent on the project site. All relevant data will be
mapped for informational purposes. This informa-
tion will be used to determine the necessity to
conduct a formal, wetland delineation for this pro-
ject, and to focus efforts to mitigate for the potential
loss of on -site wetland areas if should a delineation
become necessary. The wetland assessment_ will be
conducted concurrently with the visit to the site.
Third, The Biological Resources section of the EIR
will contain a detailed description of the existing
biological resources at the project site and will in-
clude all pertinent information collected during
conduct of the work. Additionally, the section will
identify any potential impacts to identified biologi-
cal resources that may occur as a result of the
proposed project, and provide recommended miti-
gation measures for those impacts.
30 Technical. Expertise & Issues Analysis
CULTURAL RESOURCES
,The Cultural Resources section of the EIR will as-
sess the project's potential effects on historical and
archaeological resources in. accordance with the re-
quirements. of CEQA. The Cultural Resources
section.will include a.prehistoric, ethnographic, and
historic setting for the project area; descriptions and
evaluations of any known cultural resources on the
project site; a regulatory setting that identifies appli-
cable state; federal; and local regulations that pertain
to cultural resources; and an impact analysis of po-
tendal project- specific and cumulative effects.
Where possible, mitigation measures to reduce or
eliminate adverse impacts on cultural resources to
less - than - significant levels will be identified. Based
on previous surveys in the region and a review of
the site topography, the sensitivity for the presence
of prehistoric and historic period cultural resources
appears to be low.
The Cultural Resources section of the EIR will be
based on technical report prepared by Peak & Asso-
ciates, Inc., who will work under contract to
EIP /PBS &J. The preparation of the technical report
will include the following steps. A records search
will be conducted through the Northwest Informa-
tion Center of the California Historical Resources
Information System. Records of any previously
identified cultural resources within or near the pro-
ject area will be requested. Historic - period snaps will
also be examined for pertinent information. Infor-
mation on previous surveys within the study area
will be collected.
• A letter will be sent to the Native American
Heritage Commission requesting a check of the
Sacred Lands Inventory. Letters will then be
sent to identified Native American individuals
and groups requesting information on resources
of concern on or near the project site.
• If the records search determines that the project
site has been recently and thoroughly surveyed
by cultural resources professionals, an archaeo-
logical field survey of the project site will not be
required and no charge will be made. If the re-
cords search determines that a field survey will
be required, a survey will be conducted by a
team of experienced archeologists. The survey -
ors will utilize 10- to 15 -meter survey intervals
to ensure adequate coverage of the project site.
Deviation from these intervals will only occur if
LJ
Proposal to. Prepare an Environmental Impact Report .(EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
there are physical impediments to the coverage.
Omitted areas will be delineated on the field
map and will be shown on maps included in the
technical report. Areas of previous develop-
ment will be spot - checked, but it is unlikely
that resources would be visible in these areas.
Any newly - discovered resources will be re-
corded to the standards of the California
Historical Resources Information System.
Scaled sketch maps will also be prepared. Sites
will also be drawn on the project topographic
map.
A report that meets the requirements of CEQA
will be prepared detailing the previous research,
cultural history of the project area, the results
of the field survey (if conducted), Native
American consultation, site evaluations, poten-
tial project impacts, and recommendations. The
report will contain a confidential appendix with
site forms, site sketch maps, and location maps
if sites are discovered. Should it be desired, the
report can also be written using the federal cri-
teria and the guidelines of the Corps of
Engineers to allow it to be used for the Section
106 review should the project require a permit
from the Corps of Engineers.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
About half the project site is undeveloped agricul-
tural land that has been exposed historically to
pesticides and herbicides used in the routine opera-
tion of agricultural production activities. The other
half is industrial -use land that could be expected to
contain residuals of household hazardous materials
(fuels, paints, solvents, cleaners, disinfectants, met-
als, and pesticides) as well as building materials
containing asbestos or lead, and potentially toxic
manufacturing components. The historic uses of the
site will be evaluated in the EIR for their potential
effects on future uses as proposed. The project pro-
poses the development of land for a variety of uses
including parks, residential, retail, and public facili-
ties uses that could involve the use, storage and
transport of hazardous materials. The potential for
these activities to affect the environment will be
evaluated in the EIR.
The analysis will present an overview of the federal,
state and local regulations that apply to the routine
transport, storage, use, and disposal of such materi-
als. Based on the. proposed land use categories and
City zoning regulations . for those laird use catego-
ries, the EIR will summarize the types of hazardous
materials likely to be used on the project site and
the potential for these hazardous materials to create
risks to the general public.
EIP /PBS &J will describe existing conditions of the
project site to determine whether the potential ex-
ists for workers, the public, or the environment to
be.exposed to hazardous materials during construc-
tion or operation of the project. This evaluation
will be based on a detailed review of regulatory
agency databases including records contained at the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (leaking
underground tanks), the California Health Depart-
ment and the California Department of Toxic
Substances control to determine if the project site or
surrounding sites are included on a list of hazardous
material sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5. The results of known and
available Phase I Environmental Site Assessment(s)
prepared for parcels in the proposed project area
will be incorporated in the description of existing
conditions. The hazards analysis will identify any
adopted emergency response plans and will discuss
whether the proposed project would have any po-
tential to interfere with such plans.
If existing laws, regulations, and standards do not
appear to be sufficient to minimize potential haz-
ards, the analysis will include additional
recommendations for mitigating potential hazards
and hazardous materials impacts as appropriate.
If a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is pro-
vided by the project sponsor, that information will
be considered in determining the potential impacts
related to historical uses of the project site including
historical product use and /or disposal /leakage on
the project site.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Proposed development of the Sonoma Mountain
Village site would pose several potential impacts to
hydrology and water quality. The change in land
use as a result of the project would create nearly
1900 dwelling units and about 600,000 square feet of
commercial, office and public -use buildings where
industrial and agricultural land now exists. The pro-
ject would include a staged construction program
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 31
Proposal to Preparean Environmental Impact Report (Elk) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
and could result in potential impacts to I existing
drainage ways, on and adjacent to the site, that drain
to Laguna de Santa Rosa and the Russian River.
Construction of mixed -use development and associ-
ated grading changes would modify existing
drainage patterns, and create an increase in the total
amount of impermeable surface on the site resulting
in an associated increase in stormwater runoff from
the project area. Because of the proposed land use
changes and overall decrease in surface roughness,
the project site would generate faster conveyance of
stormwater runoff, increased flow peaks, and in-
creased flow volumes. Parkland is proposed
throughout the site, with a concentration along the
downgradient (west) boundary that could mitigate
the increases in runoff associated with the project.
This concept will be evaluated in the EIR and meas-
ures will be recommended, as needed, to address
potential impacts to hydrology and water quality to
reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
EIP /PBS &J's assessment of the existing local and
regional hydrologic conditions of the project area
will focus on criteria related to site drainage, stream
flows, flood hazards, water quality, and groundwa-
ter issues. The hydrologic analysis will consider the
existing drainage pattern, proposed site grading, al-
ternative drainage designs, the potential for site
erosion, and potential impacts on the local water-
shed, including groundwater recharge.
The analysis will address requirements of the
City of Rohnert Park, the Sonoma County Wa-
ter Agency (SCWA), updated Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) require-
ments and NPDES permitting (Phase II
effective 15 March 2003). EIP/ PBS &J will
evaluate the impact of the proposed project on
local and regional hydrologic resources, including
possible infringement on the Zone B floodplain
in the northwest corner of the project site. The
analysis will address possible requirements for the
fill and disposal of excavated materials within
flood -prone areas in accordance with existing or-
dinances. The development of mitigation
measures, which would include recommenda-
tions for the preparation of the 'required Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and /or
an erosion control plan, a review (and possible
updating of) the area drainage plan, and addi-
tional construction specifications would be
32 Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis
intended to.. maintain water quality conditions
and peak flows from the site at pre - development
levels. Recommendations will be consistent with
policies described in the current Rohnert Park
General Plan.
According the General Plan, no portion of the
project site is in a 100 year floodplain, although the
northwest corner. may be in a 500 year floodplain.
The area .is drained by a. pipe system (at least 48
inch diameter), and an open channel. EIP /PBS &J
will determine the potential for both direct and
secondary flood -event impacts. Impacts analyzed
in this section of the EIR will be cross - referenced
to the utilities (storm sewer) section of the
document for continuity between sections.
The final design and placement of site drainage
facilities and their integration with the exist-
ing drainage system may. include specific drainage
design and structural control measures for the site.
Potential mitigation measures could include best
management practices (BMPs) associated with the
control of non -point source pollution during
project construction and a long -term strategy for
reducing runoff, erosion, and associated impacts to
local surface water .and groundwater. Site - specific
recommendations will be made to control storm-
water, reduce flood hazards or drainage flow
restrictions; and maintain existing water quality.
\I
Land uses surrounding the Sonoma Mountain Vil-
lage site east of Bodway Parkway are semi -rural in
character. Conversely, recent residential subdivison
development and the Agilent Technologies campus
complex that comprise a more urban landscape are
located immediately west of Bodway Parkway op-
posite the Southeast Specific Plan project site.
Excluding a five -acre parcel in the northeast portion
of the Specific Plan site with a residence and associ-
ated outbuildings, the Southeast Specific Plan
project site is vacant and has been used for the grow-
ing of hay.
The land use analysis will first define existing and
historical trends in land use in the east Rohnert
Park area to establish a basis for the setting. Next,
potential future land uses under the Sonoma Moun-
tain Village as proposed will be described with
attention given to potential effects on the sense of
Proposal to. Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for,the Sonoma Mountain Village
community character. The current status of agricul-
tural land uses on the site and within the project
area will be documented.. Land use densities, parcel
size, and the relationships between existing future
land uses and land use transitions will be explained.
The land use impact analysis will focus on potential
physical change in land use and potential land use
conflicts between proposed uses of the Sonoma
Mountain Village project site and existing and po-
tential future adjacent land uses surrounding the
Sonoma Mountain Village project site. It is noted
that the Canon Manor Specific Plan area abuts the
north margin of the Sonoma Mountain Village site
and will be reviewed for compatibility issues. De-
pending on the land use impacts identified, potential
mitigation measures could include building setbacks,
buffers, or other site planning considerations as ap-
propriate.
Since land use conflicts are generally physical in na-
ture, they are also typically analyzed in other
technical sections of an EIR (noise, visual quality,
traffic, etc.). Thus, the impact and mitigation discus-
sion will summarize and cross - reference the
technical analysis developed in other sections of the
FIR as appropriate.
NOISE
The project site is located on the southeastern edge
of Rohnert Park's developed lands, at a place where
the City's suburban residential development gives
way to open lands with scattered rural residential
uses. The northern part of the site contains the for-
mer Agilent office campus (now used for
warehousing and offices), which will be incorpo-
rated into the proposed mixed -use development for
the site; the southern pan of the site is vacant.
Camino Colegio and Bodway Parkway, the main
roads that provide motor vehicle access to the site,
are lightly traveled at present. The major regional
motor vehicle access route, US Highway 101, passes
about a mile west of the project site. The currently
unused Northwester Pacific Railroad (SMART)
right -of -way is located directly adjacent to the pro-
ject site's western boundary.
At present, there are no noise - sensitive land uses on
the project site, nor is it expected there are any ma-
jor noise sources generated on the site that would
affect existing off -site noise - sensitive land uses. This
would change with the project's introduction of on-
site residences, office use, parks, etc., and their pos-
sible inclusion among less noise- sensitive uses. and
on -site noise sources. Also, the.project would gener
ate large volumes of motor vehicle traffic that
would access the site via roadways passing many
existing residential and other noise - sensitive uses in
the site vicinity. Finally, there are plans that may
call for the eventual resumption of freight or pas-
senger service on the rail line west of the site; noise
from these operations could have a disruptive effect
on adjacent project land uses.
EIP /PBS &J will assess the potential for traffic (and
possible railroad) noise impacts on existing and pro-
posed noise - sensitive land uses and the compatibility
of the proposed project's mixture of on -site noise -
sensitive and noise - generating land uses as reflected
in the project Final Development Plan.
The EIR's noise setting will briefly summarize
acoustical terminology and the physical characteris-
tics of sound, the nature of environmental noise, the
quantitative descriptors of noise .impact, and the
relevant federal, state and local standards for assess-
ing noise impacts. The Noise discussion will also
present information on the existing noise environ-
ment on /around the project site as gathered
through a comprehensive site survey with noise
monitoring at locations sufficient to characterize
ambient noise levels on /around the site and to pro-
vide calibration data for noise models. Monitoring
locations will be selected based on the location of
present and future noise - sensitive receptors (e.g.,
existing and proposed residences, recreational areas,
etc.).
Potential noise impacts from project construction
will be evaluated based on anticipated project con-
struction schedules, project phasing and available
construction equipment noise emission data. Poten-
tial noise impacts from project operation will be
estimated using the US Department of Transporta-
tion's Traffic Noise Model (TNM), the Federal
Transit Administration's railroad noise modeling
methodology, and the well- accepted rules that relate
noise exposure to distance from stationary sources.
These models will use project- specific traffic data,
railroad operation data, and stationary source
type /location data from the project site plans.
Where significant noise impacts are found, appro-
priate mitigation strategies (e.g., sound barriers/
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 33
I
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
berms, increased landscaping buffers, alterations to
the proposed land use mix, building massing and
orientation, etc.) will be developed where feasible.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
The analysis of population and housing in accor-
dance with the CEQA Standards of Significance as
adopted by the City of Rohnert Park ties in closely
with the analysis of growth inducements as required
under CEQA. Project phasing is planned based on
the City's Growth Management Ordinance and
General Plan that require phased and controlled
development according to specified criteria includ-
ing infrastructure availability.
With the existing baseline for the City of Rohnert
Park and conditions in the project area established,
this portion of the EIR will provide an estimate of
future employment and residential population as
would be anticipated with new construction and
adaptive reuse of the existing buildings up to the
point in time of full project implementation.
Project development phasing will be considered in
the analysis and compared to growth due to cumu-
lative development in Rohnert Park as a whole.
This section will calculate the net effects on popula-
tion through jobs and housing development as
appropriate and compare the project growth to the
total jobs and population total projected for
Rohnert Park. A discussion of the jobs /housing
balance ratio as would affect or potentially reduce
commuting and dependence on the automobile will
be included. Data from the Association of Bay Area
Governments will be used to characterize project
net effects such as the change in population and
households. In addition to presenting the absolute
magnitude of the net changes, these changes will be
compared to existing conditions as percentage in-
creases and to projected growth as percentage
shares. Based on the estimate of future employment,
total housing demand will be estimated along with
that portion expected to reside in Rohnert Park.
On the issue of affordable housing, City Ordinance
677 requires that at least 15 percent of all new dwell-
ing units in a residential developments of five or
more units shall be affordable to low- and moderate-
income households, or that equivalent housing in-
lieu fees be paid prior to the issuance of a building
permit. Accordingly, as noted in the Final Devel-
34 Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis
opment Plan, Section'iII, Executive Summary, Item
B. 1.1, Affordable Housing Program, conformance
with City Ordinance No. 677 (Municipal code
chapter 17.70), would be fulfilled through a' variety
of programs including subsidized and for rent hous-
ing, second. dwelling 'units, the construction of
affordable housing, solicitation of non- profit hous-
ing enterprises, condominium' construction; and.
other programs. These aspects of the project will be
detailed and described .as proposed and a confor-
mance assessment with Ordinance 677 provided.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Owing to the size of the project, including new
residential, commercial, office and civic develop-
ment, the providers of public services and utilities
would be expected to face increased demand on
their services and facilities.
The public services and utilities section will charac-
terize and assess the Sonoma Mountain Village's
effects on police services, fire and emergency ser-
vices, schools, parks and recreation, water,
wastewater, solid waste, and gas and electricity.
Each service provider will be contacted for informa-
tion on existing conditions, for their. evaluation of
potential project impacts, and for special service
provision issues that might be involved. Applicable
Federal, State and local regulations concerning the
provision of public services and utilities will be dis-
cussed. A recent memo from the Department of
Public Safety to Maureen Rich, Senior Planner
(1/3/06) indicates that street widths, turning radi-
uses and access would not meet the current City of
Rohnert Park standards, that access for fire appara-
tus would be difficult, that the project needs specific
site review for access and that further evaluation is
needed to determine if reclaimed water would be
reliable and compatible for fire suppression. The
need for increased manpower and equipment to ac-
commodate the project is also noted in the memo.
These expressed concerns will be addressed. First,
EIP /PBS &J will identify existing service issues, ser-
vice levels, and service capacity as opportunities and
constraints. The evaluation of fire, emergency and
police protection services will focus on station loca
tions, staffing, and response times and the capability
to effectively serve the Sonoma Mountain Village
(annexation) area under developed conditions. The
discussion on schools will concentrate on public
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
schools that serve the east Rohnert Park area. A
primary concern would include the potential inabil-
ity for a local school district with limited capacity
to accommodate proposed development within the
project area. This is anticipated to be determined
through the EIR Notice of Preparation process and
direct contacts with the school districts that serve
the project area. Existirig and projected capacity of
the schools serving the project area will be pre-
sented.
Second, EIP /PBS &J will calculate service demands
for each type of service. Accepted, engineering,
planning, or community service standards used by
local service providers will be identified. The So-
noma Mountain Village project's net effects in terms
of additional resources (equipment, infrastructure,
personnel), required by service providers to main-
tain acceptable standards of service will be
documented. Based on the population increase, the
demand for recreation facilities and services, as may
be offset through the 5.8 acres of neighborhood
park space, will be assessed along with the City
Parks Department plans for other park facilities
within the City. Also, it is known that water and
sewer lines will have to be extended to serve new
development. Infrastructure routing and facility/
equipment needs will be identified as required in the
assessment of impacts. Water supply is a known
critical issue in the project area and a thorough Wa-
ter Supply Assessment is proposed for preparation
as part of this proposal (see Section 7, Task 4), to
assist the City of Rohnert Park, as Lead Agency
under CEQA for the Sonoma Mountain Village
project EIR, in satisfying the requirements of Senate
Bill 610 and City Resolution Number 2004 -95 (the
Water Policy Resolution).
Third, EIP /PBS &J will specify mitigation measures
for all public service and utility significant impacts
to eliminate impacts or to reduce them to less-than-
significant levels.
PLANNING POLICY AND
RELATIONSHIP TO PLANS
A Preliminary Development Plan was approved by
the Planning commission on May 11, 2006. A Final
Development Plan has been prepared that estab-
lishes the P -D Zoning district and describes the
nature, character and location of all development
within the project property. The Development Plan
is to provide a framework for preparation of the
EIR under CEQA. As a result, while General Plan
map and text amendments necessary for project ap-
proval have been identified for the project, it has
not been determined whether the project as pro-
posed would be consistent with the many applicable
goals and policies of the Rohnert Park General Plan
inclusive of all its recently adopted elements includ-
ing Land Use, Community Design, Transportation,
Open Space and other elements.
This portion of the EIR will provide a consistency
analysis of the Sonoma Mountain Village project
with respect to the applicable goals and policies of
each Element of the General Plan. Amatrix format
is planned to be established with the relevant Gen-
eral Plan goals and /or policies noted in the left hand
column with a project consistency analysis provided
in the immediate right hand column. Any potential
inconsistencies identified as, an outgrowth of the
analysis of each technical section of the EIR will be
rectified through the appropriate mitigation meas-
ures to the extent reasonably possible. Although
each technical section of the EIR will address impact
and mitigation issues as explained further herein, for
comprehension, all General Plan issues related to
the Sonoma Mountain village project will be docu-
mented in this section of the EIR and will set the
stage for the presentation of EIR technical sections
and environmental review in subsequent sections of
the EIR.
SOILS, GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
The project site is a very gently southwest sloping
parcel near the southern end of the Santa Rosa plain
at elevations between about 145 and 117 feet above
mean sea level. The soil is recent alluvial clay of the
Clear Lake association. The Santa Rosa plain forms
the center of the Sonoma Valley, a major valley of
the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province. Major val-
leys and ridges in this part of California trend
northwesterly, more or less parallel to the trends of
significant fault segments, defining one of the most
active seismic regions in the United States. Two
features dominate the geology of the Sonoma Val-
ley: the Hayward - Rodgers Creek fault zone, and the
potentially unstable nature of the steep slopes along
the valley walls. Because the project site is nearly
flat, although very close to the eastern valley wall,
there is little risk from potentially unstable slopes.
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 35
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
The site is about three miles southwest of the
Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, delineated
by the State, along historically active segments of
the Hayward- Rodgers Creek fault. This fault•has the
potential to pose hazards for the site, although the
City's recently updated Building Code would miti-
gate such hazards:
In general, residential /commercial mixed -use devel-
opment, such as proposed for the project site, would
have no little or effect on the geology of the area,
but would be subject to seismic groundshaking from
local and regional earthquakes. Development of the
project site would have some effect on the soils
through the grading of roads and building lots, and
would have the potential to increase erosion during
the construction period. The latest geotechnical
documentation for the area that contains mitigation
measures for these effects post -dates the adoption of
the City's updated July 2000 General Plan and the
adoption of the 2001 California Building Code. Al-
though the geo - seismic and soil conditions have not
changed substantially through the time preceding
these adoptions, the knowledge and treatment of
them was undergoing considerable revision during
the same period. Consequently, it is important to
review the current understanding of geologic and
seismic conditions in the EIR, and to ensure current
policy and code compliance, even though it appears
that these are mitigated to less than significant levels
by the General Plan EIR and subsequent revisions
to the Building Code.
The purposes of current environmental review of
soils, geology and seismicity for the project site are
three -fold: first, to identify potentially hazardous
geologic and seismic conditions that affect the area
(i.e., constraints related to groundshaking, liquefac-
tion, weak soils, etc.); second, to identify potential
alteration of the soils and topography of the area
(i.e., impacts of the proposed project on soil
strength and stability); and third, to provide infor-
mation that will indicate how those impacts are to
be reduced, eliminated or avoided (i.e., mitigation
measures, presentations of City policies, explana-
tions of Building Code requirements, etc.).
There is a recent geotechnical investigation report
for the Southeast Specific Plan site, adjacent to the
project site that will be reviewed by one of
EIP /PBS &J's California Registered Geologists for
36 Technical Expertise .& Issues Analysis
relevance to the proposed project. Together with
other published sources of engineering and geologic
documentation, this will be an important part of the
basis to prepare the EIR evaluation of the soils and
geo- seismic conditions at the project site.
EIP /PBS &J will conduct a field reconnaissance of
the project area to observe natural or man -made
hazards. The analysis will. focus on the geologic and
seismic hazards at the project . site, and on the sur-
face modification inherent in the project proposal.
Although the project site is nearly flat, the site
would be. subject to violent seismic groundshaking
hazards caused by a characteristic earthquake (Mo-
ment Magnitude 7.1) on one of the active segments
of the nearby Hayward - Rodgers Creek fault. The
analysis will consider the seismic and soil stability
effects on new structures and their occupants. These
include temporary soil /slope instability caused by
grading; erosion potential and increased hazards
produced by potential failure of foundation sup-
port; and strong seismic. groundshaking. Design
recommendations to control potential adverse ef-
fects will be identified and evaluated in the context
of relevant State and City regulations, including the
General Plan development goals and policies related
to soils, seismic safety, groundshaking, liquefaction,
and other ground failures. If further safeguards ap-
pear necessary, mitigation measures will be
recommended to achieve optimum environmental
protection, taking into account site soils, subsurface
geologic conditions and seismic conditions of the
region.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
At EIR inception, a meeting with City traffic engi-
neering and planning staff will be initiated to discuss
the project and scope of work that includes the traf-
fic and circulation studies (see also the discussion
under Task 7 below, Conduct Meetings and Hear-
ings). At this meeting consensus will be obtained on
the approach, methodologies, scenarios, format,
significance standards and all critical features and
assumptions for the traffic and circulation analysis.
Detailed meeting minutes including the amended
final scope of work will be prepared documenting
the results of this meeting. The draft minutes and
scope will be circulated for review, comment and
approval. Based on comments received on the draft
minutes and scope, a final set of minutes and scope
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact ,Report. (EIR) for the Sonoma Kountain Village
of work for the project will be sent to all study par-
ticipants. The following defines the. steps to be
undertaken in the traffic and circulation analysis.
Project Trip and Parking Generation
The volume of traffic to be generated by the So-
noma Mountain Village project will be estimated
based on information presented in Trip Generation
(Institute of Transportation Engineers, 7th Edition,
2003). Estimates of inbound and outbound vehicle
trips will be developed for the AM and PM peak
hours, and for the entire day. Project trip genera-
tion estimates will account for the elimination of
any trips associated with existing land uses to be
removed, mixed use and internal trip making char-
acteristics and transit usage. These estimates will be
crossed checked with the calibrated trip generation
characteristics of land uses within the area in the
Rohnert Park travel demand model. The proposed
on -site parking supply will be evaluated against the
expected parking demand based on industry stan-
dard methods and City Code requirements.
Project Trip Distribution
The preliminary directional distribution of the site -
generated traffic onto the roadway network will be
estimated based on information from the Rohnert
Park travel demand model, regional travel demand
model, existing travel patterns and traffic volumes
in the area. The preliminary distribution and as-
signment of project traffic will be submitted to City
of Rohnert Park staff for review and comment. Any
necessary revisions will be made to the preliminary
distribution. Based on this final trip distribution,
project generated trips will be assigned to study area
roadways for the impact analysis. Trip assignments
will be to and from all internal roadways and turn-
ing movements shall be shown for internal
roadways as well as all study intersections.
Perform Data Collection
Based on our review of the study area and prelimi-
nary trip generation and assignment estimates, we
believe that the following twenty -six intersections
comprise the study area for the project wherein the
new traffic could be reasonably expected to result in
a significant adverse impact:
■ Petaluma Hill Road /East Cotati Avenue;
■ Petaluma Hill Road /Valley House Drive;
■ Petaluma Hill Road /East Railroad Avenue;
■ Petaluma Hill Road /Adobe Road;
• Main Street /Old Redwood Highway North;
• North McDowell Boulevard /Old Redwood
Highway North;
• US 101 Northbound Ramps /Old Redwood
Highway North;
• Bodway Parkway /East Cotati Avenue;
• Bodway Parkway /Camino Colegio;
• Bodway Parkway /Valley House Drive;
• Bodway Parkway /East Railroad Avenue (fu-
ture);
• Railroad Avenue /Old Redwood Highway
North;
• US 101 Northbound Off- -Ramp /West Railroad
Avenue;
• Snyder Lane /Rohnert Park Expressway;
• Snyder Lane /Southwest Boulevard;
• Snyder Lane /East Cotati Avenue;
• Camino Colegio /East Cotati Avenue;
• Camino Colegio /Mitchell Drive;
• Camino Colegio /Mancester Avenue;
• Old Redwood Highway North /Cotati Avenue;
• Adrian Drive /East Cotati Avenue
• Lancaster Drive /East Cotati Avenue
• Lasalle Avenue /East Cotati Avenue
• Gravenstein Highway (116) /Old Redwood
Highway North;
• Gravenstein Highway (116) /US 101
Northbound Off -Ramp; and
• Gravenstein Highway (116) /US 101
Southbound Ramps.
AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts
will be collected at the 23 study intersections listed
above. Counts will be collected during non- holiday
midweek days (Tuesday to Thursday). In addition,
daily and peak hour counts will be obtained from
Caltrans for critical freeway segments in the study
area. The following mainline segments of US 101
will be evaluated as part of the transportation analy-
sis:
• US 101 between East Washington Street and
Petaluma Boulevard /Old Redwood Highway;
• US 101 between Sierra Avenue and State Route
116; and
• US 101 north of Rohnert Park Expressway.
Both northbound and southbound sections of US
to will be evaluated for all three segments.
Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis 37
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
Operating conditions will be assessed at the study
intersections and freeway segments for the follow-
ing five scenarios:
• Existing Conditions
• Existing plus Approved Projects Conditions
• Existing plus Approved Projects plus Project
• Conditions
• Cumulative Conditions
• Cumulative plus Project Conditions
The analysis of the study intersections and freeway
segments will use the methodology and criteria of
the Transportation Research Board's 2000 Highway
Capacity Manual. As part of the existing conditions
analysis, a field inventory of roadways and intersec-
tions, parking facilities, bicycle paths, and
pedestrian corridors in the project study area will be
assembled. This inventory will include general street
widths, intersection turn lanes, traffic control de-
vices, provisions for bicycles and pedestrians, transit
facilities and access issues.
A list of approved projects within the study area
will be assembled, including projects in Rohnert
Park, Cotati, Petaluma and Sonoma County. Where
available, traffic impact analyses prepared for spe-
cific projects will be obtained for use in the Existing
plus Approved Projects scenario. Where studies are
not available, a trip generation, distribution and
assignment analysis will be performed, similar to
that described above for the proposed project. The
City and regional travel demand models will be used
to establish cumulative traffic conditions through-
out the study area.
Committed circulation improvements will be
documented and included in the future year traffic
base, thus affecting the future year circulation sys-
tem capacity values. These improvements will be
derived from the capital improvements projects list
(CIP) of all affected jurisdictions, and mitigation
measures from approved projects in the study area.
To the extent possible, the proposed plan will be
reviewed for adequate circulation and access based
on City standards, AASHTO standards and Cal -
trans design policies. The on -site circulation and
access analysis will determine proper turn storage
and sight distance at main project access locations.
38 Technical Expertise & Issues Analysis
Internal roadways and intersections will be re-
viewed to determine- if safe and adequate cross'
sections are proposed throughout the project area.' .
Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transit impact Analysis
The project proposes a network of bicycle and pe-
destrian improvements and connections, including
stairs, bicycle lanes, and. bicycle and pedestrian
paths. This network will be reviewed at two levels.
First, the proposed facilities will be assessed relative
to City standards, American' Associaft.ori of State
Highway and Transportation Officials- (AASHTO)
standards and Caltrans. design policies to determine
if they meet engineering standards for safe and ade-
quate facilities. Secondly, the project area will be
reviewed to determine if additional opportunities
for pedestrian and bicycle connections are available.
The amount of transit traffic to be generated by the
project will be calculated using information from
the US Census. The effects of this new transit traffic
on local transit providers and lines will be docu-
mented and described.
Travel Demand Management
All Travel Demand Management (TDM) measures
proposed by the project will be described and -their
effectiveness will be assessed. In addition, additional
project specific TDM measures will be developed
and proposed to help off -set project traffic increases.
Potential TDM measures could include — secure
bicycle storage, showers and changing rooms, tran-
sit subsidies, shuttles, preferential parking for
carpools, telecommuting incentives, transit, bicycle
and pedestrian facilities, and a dedicated TDM coor-
dinator.
The project will be assessed, and all TDM measures
will be developed in accordance with the City's.
Growth Management Ordinance.
Identify Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Based on the results of the level of service analysis,
any significant adverse impacts will be identified in
accordance with adopted City of Rohnert Park
Thresholds of Significance standards. Mitigation
measures will be developed for all identified im-
pacts. Project contributions to any significant
cumulative impacts will also be identified. Alterna-
tive mitigation measures will be discussed with City
staff during the analysis period and included in the
EIR analysis.
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sn.aaoma Mountain Village
L�
Work Program
& Deliverables
The following describes EIP's work program and
document deliverables in preparation of the Sonoma
Mountain Village Program EIR. Because implementing
the Sonoma Mountain Village project will be phased
over a period of years, the EIR will be developed
as a Program EIR. This would be consistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15165 regarding projects
that are phased where a single Program EIR shall be
prepared for the ultimate project. A Program EIR is
an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions
that can be characterized as one large project (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15168). The intent is to deal with
all project activities, including subsequent activities
of-the program, as specifically and comprehensively
as possible. With a good and detailed analysis of the
program, many subsequent activities could be found
to be within the scope of the project described in the
program EIR and no further environmental documents
would be required. The work program is based on
information contained in the Sonoma Mountain Village
Final Development Plan text and maps, project site
inspections, EIP /PBS &J local experience in addressing
environmental issues respecting the Southeast Specific
Plan project, experience in preparing EIRs for projects
of similar land use mix and magnitude, and our
knowledge of CEQA requirements. EIP /PBS &J's
work program is divided into the following specific
tasks to facilitate overall coordination of the work and
project management.
Task 1. Define the Project, Review Data and
Determine Existing Conditions
Task 2. Conduct Scoping Meeting
Task 3. Prepare Administrative Draft EIR
Task 4. Prepare Water Supply Assessment
Task 5. Prepare Draft EIR
Task 6. Prepare Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
Task 7. Conduct Meetings and Hearings
Task 8. Prepare Final EIR
The list of deliverables is as follows:
• Report of EIR agency /public Scoping findings.
• Administrative Draft EIR —Ten (10) copies.
• Draft EIR — One - hundred (100) copies plus one
(1) reproducible copy and one (I) electronic copy
in PDF format.
• Administrative Final EIR —Ten (10) copies.
• Final EIR — One - hundred (100) copies plus one
(1) reproducible copy and one (1) electronic copy
in PDF format.
• Administrative Draft Water Supply Assessment -
Ten (10) copies.
Work Program & Deliverables 39
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to .Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Patterson Ranch Planned District
• Draft Water. Supply Assessment Ten (10)
copies.
• Final Water Supply Assessment - Twenty-five (25)
copies plus one (1) reproducible copy and one (1)
electronic copy in PDF format.
■ Administrative Draft Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program —Teri (10) copies.
■ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program —
Twenty -five (25) copies plus one (1) reproducible
copy, and one (1) electronic copy in PDF
format.
TASK 1. DEFINE THE PROJECT,
REVIEW DATA AND DETERMINE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Working with Planning Department staff, EIP /PBS &J
will verify the characteristics of the Sonoma Mountain
Village project as defined and presented in the Final
Development Plan (November 22, 2006), and collect
all supporting project description materials and other
project documentation as necessary. At the outset
of work on the Administrative Draft EIR, the study
team will be given all project description materials and
maps, as provided by Department staff.
EIP /PBS &J will gather existing data, reports, studies,
and any relevant EIRs that define existing conditions
on or near the Sonoma Mountain Village project site.
In addition, EIP /PBS &J maintains a comprehensive
library of planning and environmental research
materials covering a broad range of subject areas. Table
1 lists specific materials requested (as available) to
begin work on the EIR and notes those items currently
on hand. Other materials not listed in Table 7 -1 and
in the EIP /PBS &J files are expected to be used in the
studies as well.
Table 7 -1. Items Requested for
Administrative Draft EIR
Item
Status
Sonoma Mountain Vi age Final
Development Plan text and maps.
On fi e
Rohnert Park 2020 General Plan
On fi e
General Plan EIR
On fi e
City Zoning Code
On fi e
Aerial P otograp '
On tle
i - General Aerial is in file. Aerial with increased resolution
40 Work Program & Deliverables
D4- 1093.97:0307
Site grading plans
On file
Any studies commissioned y
Not on file
the applicant (wetlands, Natural
Resources Conservation Program,
etc.)
County City Community Separator
On file
Agreement
Growth Management Ordinance
On e
City of Rohnert Park Ordinances
On e
677, 676, 671, 667
City/South County Settlement
On file
Agreement
Southeast Specific Plan EIR
On e.
University District Specific Pan
Not on e
EIR
Northeast Specific Plan EIR
Not on e
Field inspections will be necessary to familiarize the
project team with existing site and surrounding area
conditions. This knowledge will help to verify existing
data, determine the need for further technical data,
and assess the need for additional field information or
more detailed site investigations as necessary as EIR
preparation progresses.
Site investigations will be conducted to supplement
existing information. EIP /PBS &J team and
subconsultant staff will visit the Sonoma Mountain
Village project site to assess existing physical
conditions with respect to land use; view access, view
corridors and existing structures; traffic circulation and
safety; drainage and existing drainage improvements;
soil conditions; vegetation and associated biologic
resources; cultural resources; noise exposure and other
features of the Sonoma Mountain Village project site
and surrounding area as required.
To assess Sonoma Mountain Village project impacts,
EIP /PBS &J will conduct an independent review
an analysis of any technical studies and documents
for the project that have been submitted.to the City
Planning Department -by the project applicant (see
Table 7 -1 above). The review and analysis will indicate
conclusions that maybe in question, or whe re additional
study may be required to substantiate conclusions.
Based on existing information and inquiries about the
project, a significant amount of technical data is not
expected from the project applicant at this time. It
is expected that most, if not all technical data will be
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
generated by the EIP /PBS &J and its subconsultant
team. However, EIP /PBS &J's analysis of impacts
and mitigation measures for the EIR will fill in any
gaps in the analysis and conclusions contained in
project- sponsored reports, as necessary while making
maximum use of existing information.
TASK 2. CONDUCT SCOPING
MEETING
Senior EIP /PBS &J project staff will assist Planning
Department staff to convene and conduct a public/
agency scoping meeting to discuss the scope and
content of the EIR. The Planning Department will
advertise for the scoping meeting at the outset of
work. EIP /PBS &J will collaborate with the
Department in the design, preparation, and
presentation of graphic exhibits as necessary to
conduct a successful public /" agency scoping meeting.
At the meeting, the City's project manager might
describe the proposed project, and EIP's project
manager might provide an overview of CEQA,
describe the purpose of the EIR and EIR scheduling,
and answer any questions the audience may have
regarding the environmental review process and
schedule.
All comments will be collected and summarized by
subject category and presented in a report available
to all .attendees and the preparers of the EIR_ The
report will serve as a checklist by the EIR study team
in completing preparation of the EIR technical
sections. Results of responses to the EIR Notice of
Preparation issued by the City will be included in
the document.
One public scoping technique that EIP /PBS &J has
employed in the past for controversial projects is
to set up tables for the various subjects to be
addressed in the EIR. Members of the audience can
circulate among the tables, present comments to be
addressed in the EIR, and ask questions of the staff at
each table. We have found this technique to both
shorten the length and improve the content of
public scoping sessions. Unless determined otherwise
by the City, this format is anticipated for the project
scoping meeting.
TASK 3 PREPARE
ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT
EIP /PBS &J will prepare an EIR in full compliance
with CEQA and State guidelines. Environmental
effects will be addressed in proportion to their
severity and probability of. occurrence. We will
concentrate on those areas of specific concern
identified at the public scoping session and in
responses to the NOP. The NOP is to be prepared
and distributed by the Planning Department.
EIP /PBS &J will prepare an Administrative Draft
EIR ( ADEIR) in conformance with the EIR format
as approved by Planning Department staff. All text
and graphics to be used in the Draft EIR will be
included in proposed final form. Ten copies of the
ADEIR will be prepared and delivered to the
Planning Department for review and comment.
Table 7 -2 contains a suggested format for the
Program EIR in the form of a preliminary outline.
Key sections of the ADEIR are described below.
Table 7 -2. EIR Outline Prelimina
Introduction
Pur ose of EIR
EIR Sco in
Standard for Adequacy
Significant Effect on the Environment
Cumulative Impact Assessment
Mitization Monitorinvand Reporting
1. Summary
1.1
Proposed Pro ect Back round
1.2
Sonoma Mountain Village Project
Description
1.3
Areas of Controversy, Issues to be Resolved
1.4
Major EIR Conclusions
1.5
Re uiced Approvals
_
2. Pr_o'ect Description
2.1
Project Location
— —
21
Project Back-round and Origination
2.3
Objectives of Project Sponsor
2.4
Project Characteristics and Components
Work Program & Deliverables 41
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to .Prepare an En.viro €.ttttental Impact Report (EIR) .for tb.e Patterson Ranch Planned District.
2.5
Project Scheduling and Require
Approvals
Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation
Measures
3.1
Aest etics an Urban Design
3.2
Air Quality
373
Biological Resources
3.T_
.
Cultural Resources
3.5
Geology and Soi sr
3.6
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
37
Hydrology and Water Quality 3
3.8
Land Use and Planning,
3.9
Noise
3.10
P1 anning Policy and Relationship to Plans
3.11
Population and Housing
3.12
Public Services
3.13
Traffic and Circulation
3714—
Utilities and Service Systems
4. Growth Inducement
5. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
6: Alternatives
6.1
No Project
6.2
Alternative Project Site
63
Alternative Project Configuration
6.4
ternative Project Size
6.5
Mitigated Project Alternative
6.6
Environmentally Superior Alternative
7. 1 rreversible Environmental Changes
8. Report Preparation
Appendices (Provisional)
A.
Water Supply Assessments
B.
Level of Service Definitions
C.
Species List
D.
Concepts of Environmental Noise
E.
(To e determined)
Summary
The beginning of the EIR will contain a separate
section summarizing all data, findings, and conclusions
contained in the body of the report. The Summary
2 Includes discussion of mineral resources-
3 Includes discussion of capacity of drainage facilities (storm sewer)
4. Includes discussion of agricultural resources
5 Due to the anticipated size of the Water Supply Assessmentk, it is likely
that a summary of the document will he included as EIR Appendix A
42 Work Program & Deliverables
D4:1093.97:0307
will begin with a concise description of the Sonoma
Mountain village project components. The Summary
will also include (1) each significant effect and level
of significance before and after . mitigation, and
alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect.
(2) areas of controversy, including issues raised by
agencies and the public; and (3) issues to be resolved,
including any choice among alternatives and suggested
and required mitigation measures. The degree to
which impacts would be reduced by implementing all
recommended mitigation measures will be quantified,
and will be based on absolute numbers to the extent"
possible. Impacts that would be avoided, or would be
reduced to less than significant levels when mitigated,
will be identified. A matrix summarizing all impacts
and mitigation measures for the proposed Sonoma
Mountain Village project as compared to each of the
project alternatives examined in the EIRwill be provided
for comprehension and to facilitate an understanding
of the environmental trade -offs (benefits, liabilities) to
be had between the various alternatives.
Project Description
The Sonoma Mountain Village project applicant's
objectives will be described to provide the baseline
of the analysis. The Project Description will contain
(1) regional location and site location maps; (2) a
statement of project goals and objectives; (3) plans for
construction and project phasing as appropriate; and
(4) the uses and specific decisions for which the EIR
will be used, including approvals, and other agencies
having jurisdiction over environmental resources that
will use the EIR in the evaluation of the Sonoma
t&'tountain Village project.
The project description will contain the following
major elements:
• A site location map indicating the project's precise
boundaries_
• A regional location map.
• A statement of the project applicant's objectives.
• A description of each component of the Sonoma
Mountain Village project, including its technical
and environmental characteristics as well as any
supporting public service facilities that are part of
the project, and plans for construction and project
phasing. Specific reference to the SmartCode
P -D Zoning -District will be provided together
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the So otita Mountain Village
with supporting graphic materials to fully explain
development standards by zone as indicated on
the Sonoma Mountain Village Zoning /Regulating
Plan map..
■ . A list of other agencies that will use the EIR.
■ A list of approvals for which the EIR will be
used.
■ A list of the Sonoma Mountain Village project
decisions for which the Lead Agency (City of
Rohnert Park) will use the EIR
Settings and Impacts
A comprehensive overall description of the Sonoma
Mountain Village project area setting will be
developed to provide an overview of the environmental
conditions found on and around the project site and
to serve as the basis for analyzing project impacts. A
setting description will be provided for each of the
technical subjects studied (i.e., Traffic and Circulation,
Hydrology and Water Quality, etc.).
The analysis will document potential environmental
impacts and mitigation measures for the Sonoma
Mountain Village project as a whole. Significant and
less than significant impacts will be differentiated,
the purpose of this being that the, reader will be
able to grasp the "bottom line' of the analysis. The
reasons that various potentially significant effects
of the project were determined not to be significant
will be documented. The extent of the discussion of
impacts will reflect the severity of the impacts and
their likelihood of occurrence. All impact analyses
will differentiate between the incremental effects of
the Sonoma Mountain Village project and cumulative
effects with respect to cumulative development in the
Rohnert Park area as appropriate.
Each identified impact and mitigation measure
will have a specific coded number for the purpose
of documenting mitigation- monitoring actions.
Mitigation measures will be described after each
identified impact. Mitigation measures will be
presented in a manner that will allow them to be
extracted from the EIR in the form of conditions of
approval. Where several measures are available to
mitigate an impact, each will be discussed, along with
the basis for suggesting a particular measure.
A key feature of the impacts analysis will be to provide
information about how impact potential is determined.
The CEQA and City criteria for impact significance
(Thresholds of Significance) will be listed prior to the
impact discussion for each subject area investigated.
This allows comprehension and continuity of the
analysis and establishes the foundation on which to
draw important conclusions regarding the significance
of the environmental impact. Each discussion of
impact potential will conclude with a summary
statement indicating whether an identified impact,
would be significant or less than significant, based on
the analysis provided under the specific threshold of
significance.
Cumulative Effects
The CEQA Guidelines define a cumulative impact as
that resulting from the combined effect of a proposed
project plus all other reasonably foreseeable projects.
The key characteristics of a cumulative impact analysis
are:
• A project impact (significant or not), plus
• Impacts from other projects of the same type as
that of the project, and
• The interaction of these impacts to create a
cumulative impact affecting the same geographic
unit of analysis as that of the proposed project.
Environmental impacts from development projects
within the area could interact with those of the
proposed project to create cumulative impacts. Based
on the record and our local experience, of particular
concern for the cumulative analysis may be potential
impacts related to traffic and circulation, water supply,
public services, utilities, drainage and water quality,
noise, visual quality and cornrnunity character, and
other subject areas to be determined as EIR preparation
progresses.
EIP /PBS&J will consult with Planning Department
staff to prepare a list of projects that is underway and/
or development that is reasonably foreseeable and the
scheduling of their implementation including phasing.
As background, at the time of preparing the Southeast
Specific Plan EIR, the City was processing development
applications for five Specific Plan Areas (including
the Southeast Specific Plan Area) within its Sphere of
Work Program & Deliverables 43
D4A093.97:0307
Proposal 'to Prepare an. Environmental Ian pact Deport. (EIR) for the Patterson Ranch Planned District
Influence. There was also a redevelopment proposal
within the City Center area (known as the City Center
project), and an additional designated Specific Plan
Area known as Canon Manor identified as a growth
area located in unincorporated Sonoma. County. In
addition, the Graton'Rancheria Resort Hotel /Casino
project was the formative stages of planning. The
status of these projects will be determined prior to the
analysis of cumulative development impacts.
Cumulative impacts will be specified as to their
degree of severity in the individual technical sections
of the EIR, cross - referenced where required between
sections, and summarized in the Summary section of
the document.
Construction Impacts
The CEQA Guidelines require that the environmental
impacts of all phases of a project be considered,
including construction. EIP /PBS &J will analyze
the Sonoma "Mountain Village project's potentially
significant construction impacts as applicable along
with project operational impacts in each technical
section of the EIR. Key issues in the analysis of
construction impacts are anticipated to include air
quality, noise, traffic and circulation, drainage and
water quality -and visual quality.
Growth Inducement
EIP /PBS &J will prepare a section that discusses the
ways in which the Sonoma Mountain Village project
could foster economic or population growth, either
directly or indirectly (CEQA Guidelines, Section
151262(d)). A project can indirectly induce growth
through:
• An increased demand for goods and services
(jobs) associated with new residents.
• An increased demand for housing associated with
new employees of an area_
■ An expansion of public service capacity required
for residential or commercial growth.
The Growth Inducement analysis will take into
account project phasing, findings regarding cumulative
development impacts, and reference the provisions and
policies as contained in the City's General Plan Land
Use and Growth Management Element.
44 Work Program & Deliverables
D1:1093.97:0307
Project Alternatives
The analysis of project alternatives is an. important
element of an EIR. The purpose of the analysis
of alternatives is to focus on alternatives that are
capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any
significant environmental effects of a project, even if
those alternatives would impede to some degree the
attainment of the project objectives or would be more
costly. The range of alternatives is to include those that
could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives
of a project and could avoid or substantially lessen one
or more of the significant effects. Among the factors
that may be taken into account when addressing the
feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic
viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan
consistency or other plans or regulatory limitations,
including jurisdictional boundaries.
For the Sonoma Mountain Village project, it will be
necessary to assure that a reasonable range of options
is examined, thus providing a complete understanding
of full project implementation, partial project
implementation, and no development. The spectrum
of alternatives presented will indicate which options
for development are feasible given the environmental
and social context of the Sonoma Mountain Village
project. The key issue is whether the selection and
discussion of alternatives fosters informed decision -
making and public participation. Significant effects
that would be caused by the choice of an alternative
will be discussed to the extent that the effects are
different from the Sonoma Mountain Village project
as proposed.
At the conclusion of the alternatives analysis, a matrix
will be prepared chat summarizes the impacts of the
project as compared to each of the alternatives studied by
subject category (i.e., noise, traffic, biological resources)
for a side -by -side comparison. This will substantially
improve reader comprehension of the complete results
of the analysis of the Sonoma Mountain Village project
and alternatives to the project.
The following provides a tentative list of alternatives
envisioned for discussion in the EIR at this time.
This listing does not preclude other alternatives for
evaluation in the EIR, depending on the results of the
impacts and mitigation analysis.
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental. Impact Report (EIR) for tlie. �o.aiortiaiiountazrt Villa
• No Project. The No Project Alternative will. be
examined as required by CEQA. This examination
will assess the impacts of maintaining the Sonoma
Mountain Village project site in its present
condition, including developed and undeveloped
portions of the project site as currently exists.
This alternative will serve as.a basis for comparing
the impacts of other alternatives. Potential site
development under existing City General Plan
provisions and zoning will be. documented in the
discussion.
• Alternative Project Site-This alternative will focus
on a possible alternative location for the proposed
project. A key question and the first step in the
analysis of alternatives is whether any of the
significant effects of a project would be avoided
or substantially lessened by putting the project
in another location. Only locations that would
avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects of the project will be considered. If it is
concluded that no feasible alternative locations
exist, this will be disclosed along with the reasons
for such a- conclusion
• Alternative Project Configuration and /or Size.
Depending on the results of the analysis, the
concept of an Alternative Project Configuration
may be addressed whitel recognizing the provisions
of the Sonoma Mountain Village SmartCode P-
D Zoning District and maintaining consistency
with the General Plan. This could include a
project of reduced density if appropriate or
shifts in land use. This alternative would be
in response to the identified impacts and the
implementation of mitigation measures to reduce
the impacts to less than significant levels. The
objective would be to identify options for site
development that effectively avoid the identified
environmental impacts through alterations in
project configuration and /or size, including
considerations for density and land use.
Additionally, this alternative will allow for a description
of alternatives to the project as proposed the project
applicant previously considered in preparing the Final
Development Plan and reasons for their rejection.
■ Mitigated Project Alternative. This alternative
will include a listing of all mitigation measures
contained in the EIR by subject category, and in so
doing may define the Sonoma Mountain Village
project somewhat differently than originally
described, depending on the outcome of the
impacts analysis. While this alternative cannot
be defined until the studies are well under way,
it will ultimately provide an informed method
for assessing the degree of reduction of potential
impacts on the Sonoma Mountain Village project
site in comparison to the project as proposed.
The analysis will contairta complete description
of this alternative to enable the reader to compare
it with the project as proposed.
■ Environmentally Superior Alternative. As
specified in CEQA and as determined by case
law, the EIR will include the identification of
an Environmentally Superior Alternative. The
Environmentally Superior Alternative, to be
selected from the alternatives noted above or as
otherwise generated in the analysis, and will be
identified and explained as required by CEQA,
excluding the No Project Alternative. Significant
effects that would be caused by the choice of an
alternative will be discussed to the extent that the
effects are different from the Sonoma Mountain
Village project as proposed.
At the completion of preparing the Administrative
Draft EIR, ten copies will be printed and delivered to
the Planning Department for review and comment.
TASK 4. PREPARE WATER SUPPLY
ASSESSMENT
Water Supply Assessment (WSA) Statute
A water supply assessment (WSA) pursuant to SB 610
will need to be prepared and approved for the Sonoma
Mountain Village project prior to completion of the
EIR. Senate Bill 610 and its companion legislation SB
221 were passed into law in 2001 and amended Water.
Code 9 Sections 10631, 10656, 10910, 10911,
10912, and t090, to repeal Section 10913 f, and to
add and repeal Section 10657. These laws reflect the
growing awareness of the need to incorporate water
supply and demand analysis at the earliest possible
stage in the land use planning process.
Work Program & Deliverables 45
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental I.nrpact Report (ETF0 for the fatter :son Ranch Planned. District
As a result of the enactment of SB.610, water supply
assessments must be furnished to local governments
for inclusion in any environmental documentation
for projects meeting the specified requirements under
Section 10912 (a) of the Water Code and subject to
California .Environmental Quality Act'(CEQA). A
project meets the requirement for SB 610, if it includes
any of the following development plans. In this case,
the proposed project is a mixed -use project . that
includes one or more of the elements listed below.
■ Contains more than 500 dwelling units
• Proposes a shopping center or business
establishment employing more than 1,000
persons or having more than 500,000 square feet
of floor space.
• Proposes an office building employing more than
1,000 persons or having more than 250,000
square feet of floor space:
• Proposes a hotel or motel, or both, having more
than 500 rooms.
• Proposes industrial uses planned to house more
than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres
of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet
of floor area.
■ A mixed use project that includes one or more of
the projects specified above.
■ A project that would demand an amount of water
equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of
water required by a 500 dwelling unit project.
Water Supply Background
The City of Rohnert Park has become a critical part
of the case law surrounding Water Supply Assessments
following the lawsuit by the environmental watch
group Open space - Water Resource Protection — Land
Use (O.W.L)_ The case is being watched state wide and
has significant implications relating to the breadth of
analysis required for a WSA. The City stands behind
their interpretation of SB 610 with regard to fulfilling
the statute requirements of a WSA and concluding
sufficiency of supplies for seven proposed projects.
Since the completion of the WSA, two important
documents have been completed: 1) the Sonoma
County General Update EIR, and 2) the Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) for the City of Santa
Rosa, the major population center of Sonoma County.
A WSA should address cumulative demand for the
46 Work Program & Deliverables
D4:1093.97:0307
entire groundwater sub -basin and would be remiss by
not updating the discussion of available water supply
with recent technical studies completed in the area.
On a broader scale, a coalition of 14 environmental and
community groups is challenging Sonoma County's
water availability projections, claiming in a lawsuit
that the Water Agency, is ignoring signals of severe
water shortages. The suit seeks to invalidate the Water
Agency's recently released Urban Water Management
Plan which projects that Sonoma County will have
enough water for the next 20 years if the Agency can
secure state approval to increase by about a third the
amount of water that can be drawn from reservoirs.
Prepare Water Supply Assessment
EIP /PBS &J will provide water supply planning
assistance, as per the requirements of SB 610. Water
supply planning under SB 610 requires reviewing and
identifying adequate available water supplies necessary
to meet the demand generated by the project, as well as
the cumulative demand over the next 20 years, under
a range of water conditions. Tasks within this effort
include such issues as: 1) analysis of past, current, and
projected future water demand; 2) past, current, and
projected water supply; 3) consideration of variability
in demand and supply figures based upon hydrologic
conditions; 4) identification of potential water
shortages based upon this analysis; 5) coordination
with the local community, as well as other affected
agencies; and, 6) consideration of social, geographic,
and economic factors of an area. If it is determined
there are insufficient supplies to meet demand over the
next 20 years, the Agency will need to identify where
those supplies will come from.
Finally, according to the requirements of SB 610, if
groundwater is a source of supply, there must be a
description of the condition of the basin. In addition,
if groundwarer is identified as a possible source, Section
10910 (f) of the Water Code also applies, as such, a
description of the groundwater basin or basins from
which the proposed project will be supplied must be
included in the WSA. This includes an analysis of the
amount and location of past and current groundwater
pumping, as well as the amount and location of
groundwater projected to be pumped to meet the
future water demand associated with the proposed
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Moutt.tain Village
project, as well as the projected cumulative demand,
based on " information that is_ reasonably available,
including, but not limited to, historic use records."
The proposed Sonoma Mountain Village project will
increase . the demand for water supplies within the
service area. The size of the proposed project meets
the standards under which a WSA must be considered
as part of any CEQA analysis under SB 610.
Administrative Draft WSA
EIP /PBS &J will prepare an Administrative Draft WSA
for City staff review and comment. The WSA will be
prepared consistent with the requirements of SB 610
and model the approach from the most recent WSA
(currently on appeal), but update the discussion to be
current with, the County General Plan Update and
other significant developments within. the Basin. EIP/
PBS &J will review existing materials and conduct the
appropriate supply and demand analysis. Included in
this step are the following activities:
■ Determine the available water supplies for the
region and service areas, then summarize this
information according to the source of the supply.
This information will include an observation of
trends and reliance on estimated vs. verified water
usage from all the City's sources.
■ Determine what the future demand will be in
the service area on a cumulative basis in terms
of number and types of connections, as well as
the expected demand per class of connection.
Develop an analysis of projected water supplies
over the next 20 years. This analysis will include
consideration of source water reliability in terms
of water quality, as well as availability during wet,
normal and dry "years, and multiple dry years.
This analysis will include a discussion of water
supplies that meet these requirements under the
guidelines of SB 610.
■ Identify reasonable alternative sources of water
(if available) to meet any recognized shortfalls
between projected supply and demand, as well
as a description of recommended future studies
or actions needed to identify and/ or acquire
additional water.
• Determine the number and types of water service
connections associated with the proposed project,
as well as the additional demand generated within
Zone 7's local service area, and allocate water
demand to various types of service connections.
• Carry the demand analysis out for a projected
twenty-year period in 5 -year increments
beginning in 2005 through 2030, and present
this information in a tabular format.
• Conduct an assessment of the potential demand
versus the available supplies as identified in the
above tasks and present this information in the
form of a technical report.
Following completion of the above, ten (10) copies of
the Administrative Draft WSA will be delivered to the
City for review and comment.
Draft and Final WSA
Based on one consolidated set of comments from City
staff on the Administrative Draft WSA, EIP /PBS &J
will incorporate any corrections and /or modifications
and prepare a Draft version of the WSA. Ten (10)
copies of the Draft WSA will be provided to the City
for final review. It is assumed that any comments on the
Administrative Draft version will be primarily editorial
and no significant new technical analysis required.
Based on one consolidated set of comments from the
City staff on the Draft WSA, EIP /PBS &J will prepare
the Final WSA and draft findings for delivery to Gty
staff for review prior to publication. It is assumed that
any comments on the Draft WSA will be editorial and
no significant new technical analysis required.
Twenty -five (25) printed copies of the Final WSA
with one (1) reproducible copy and one (t) electronic
copy in PDF format will be provided to the City for
adoption prior to EIR certification. A complete
summary of the WSA will be included as an appendix
in the Draft EIR.
Work Program & Deliverables 47
E)4:1093.97,0307
Proposal to Prepare an Environmental Inipact Repoi°t (Elk) for the Pattersota Ranch Planned. District
TASK 5. PREPARE DRAFT
PROGRAM EIR
Following City review of an Administrative Draft
EIR, EIP /PBS &J will prepare the Draft EIR for
publication that incorporates responses to the Planning
Department's comments. One hundred (100) copies
of the Draft EIR will be printed and delivered to the
Planning Department for distribution. EIP /PBS &J
will send screen -check copies of the Draft EIR to the
Department prior to printing,tf requested.. At the time
of delivery, one (1) single -sided reproducible (camera -
ready) copy of the Draft EIR will be submitted along
with an electronic copy in PDF format for posting on
the internet.
TASK 6. PREPARE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
Concurrent with preparation of the EIR, EIP /PBS &J
will prepare an Administrative Draft Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance
with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, which
Planning Department staff will review. The Program
will identify each mitigation measure for a significant
environmental impact and will specify the following:
• Performance criteria and standards necessary for
the mitigation to be successful.
• Responsible parties for implementing the
mitigation measures.
• The frequency of monitoring as applicable and
maximum period of time for implementation.
• The frequency of reporting the outcome of
monitoring activities.
• Those responsible for verifying the success of the
mitigation measures, and sanctions to be imposed
for noncompliance with required mitigation
measures.
Ten (10) copies of the Administrative Draft Program
will be submitted to the Department for review.
After Department review of the Administrative Draft
Program, EIP /PBS &J will revise the Program as
necessary in response to Department staff comments.
Although EIP /PBS &J will prepare the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, the actual
48 Work Program & Deliverables
D4 1093.97:0307
monitoring activities will be undertaken by a separate
entity under contract to either . the project applicant or
City. Worksheets /follow -up forms for each mitigation
measure will be provided. Twenty-five (25) copies of
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
will be produced and.delivered to the City. One (1)
single -sided reproducible copy of the Program will also
be provided at this time along with one (1) electronic
copy in PDF format.
TASK 7. CONDUCT MEETINGS
AND HEARINGS
The work program calls for periodic meetings with
Planning Department and Engineering staff during
the course of EIR preparation. Five meetings with
Planning Department /Engineering staff are planned
during preparation of the Administrative Draft, Draft,
and Final EIRs at regular intervals. We recommend the.
first meeting with City staff occur when preparation
of the Administrative Draft EIR and Water Supply
Assessment begins. It will be desirable to focus this
meeting on the following topics:
11 Overall scope of work and scheduling
requirements.
• Project data needs and requested documents/
information.
• Technical requirements of the Water Supply
Assessment (WSA).
• Approach and methodologies for conducting the
Traffic and Circulation analysis (see discussion
above under Item 6, !'ethnical Expertise and Issues
Analysis) .
• Approach to addressing cumulative development
impacts.
• Number and character of project alternatives.
• Scheduling and conducting the public scoping
session.
The second and third meetings are proposed to occur
during preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR
and Draft WSA to discuss impact findings to date,
proposed mitigation measures, findings of the WSA,
scheduling, and other items as considered necessary.
The fourth meeting is proposed to occur after
completion of the Administrative Draft EIR, the Final
WSA and Administrative Mitigation Monitoring and
Proposal to Prepare an .Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma Mountain Village
Reporting Program. The purpose of this meeting is
to review Planning Department staff. comments on
all three documents at the discretion of the Planning
Department prior to preparing the Draft EIR, and the
amended Monitoring Program prior to publication. If
desired, a fifth meeting may occur atthe close of the
Draft EIR comment period to review and determine
the overall approach to responding to all comments
received from the public and agencies on the Draft
EIR. This would be particularly true with respect to
any controversial issues that may surface during the
course of the studies.
We understand that the City will advertise for and
conduct public meetings /hearings on the Draft
EIR. At the public meetings /hearings, EIP's project
manager and traffic subconsultant representative will
be available to summarize and explain the document
and respond to questions and issues raised. EIP
staff will also attend the public meetings /hearings as
required to respond to or explain particular issues of
importance. Four public meetings /hearings to review
the Draft and Final EIR and WSA are planned for, two
before the Planning Commission and two before the
City Council.
Regarding the WSA to be prepared for the project, it is
recommended City engineering staff be present at the
first project (kickoff) meeting to address the technical
requirements required during preparation of the WSA.
EIP staff that prepared the WSA will also be present at
a City Council meeting to answer questions regarding
preparation of 'the WSA and conclusions contained in
the WSA regarding water supply and use.
TASK 8. PREPARE FINAL
PROGRAM EIR
EIP /PBS&J will respond to comments on the Draft
EIR received at the public hearings and letters of
comment received during the public review period
in the Administrative Final E[R. Master Responses
will be prepared where there are a sufficient number of
comments addressing a specific subject area to warrant
the preparation of Master Responses. Response pages
will be organized to immediately follow comment
pages to facilitate use of the document.
Ten (10) copies of the Administrative Final EIR will be
delivered to the Planning Department for review and
comment. Responses to comments will be numbered
and keyed to the list of comments. Revisions to the
Draft EIR as contained in the Final EIR document
(Comments and Responses) will be indicated through
the use of underlines and strikeouts as required for
ease of reference. After the Planning Department has
reviewed the Administrative Final EIR, EIP /PBS &J
will amend the document and print one hundred
(100) copies of the Final EIR for distribution by
the Department. The Final EIR (Comments and
Responses) will be submitted as a separate volume.
It is understood that the Draft EIR will not need to be
amended and republished as a result of preparing the
Final EIR. Ascreen review copy of the Final EIR will be
submitted to the Department for review, if requested,
before the Department gives the go -ahead for printing
the final document. At the time of delivery, one (1)
single -sided reproducible copy of the Final EIR will be
provided with an electronic copy in PDF format for
posting on the internet if desired.
Work Program & Deliverables 49
D4:1093.97,0307
11roposal to Prepare an .Envl.rcanmaital Impact Report (EIR) for the S,�.t�€araaa �rurrtair� Village
Schedule
Figure 8 -1 illustrates our proposed schedule for the EIR
Work Program as described above. The Administrative
Draft EIR will be completed within 16 weeks after
receiving authorization to proceed. Following Planning
Department review of the Administrative Draft EIR,
we estimate that four weeks will be required to prepare
the Draft E[R for printing and distribution.
Assuming that about 200 to 300 comments received
on the Draft EIR will require responses, we estimate
that about five weeks will be required to prepare the
Administrative Final EIR The Final EIR would be
available for the Planning Department to distribute
three weeks after Department comments are received
on the Administrative Final EIR-
It should be noted that if the project is delayed due to
circumstances beyond EIP's reasonable control, or if
decisions are made about the project that change the
project description or alternatives, the FIR schedule
could be adversely affected. However, we believe that
the schedule presented herein represents an optimum
balance between timeliness and the need for a thorough,
comprehensive, and defensible EIR.
Schedule 51
D4. 1093.97 -0307
Timeframes are based on timely receipt of all necessary project
information.
C
Client /Team Meeting _
Public Meeting / Hearin
Draft EIR Track
Draft EIR Track - Action Required by City
WSA Track
® WSA Track - Action Required by Ci
Final EIR Track
Final FIR Track - Action Re wired by City
s(: Other Pro'ect Activities
Other Project Activities - Action Required by City
EIP Associates
Pi,oposal to Prepare an Eavironniental Inipact Report fl) T"U'r thf,, Sonoma Mountain Vilna
93
Appendices
Please note: the five hard copy EIR examples that
were requested for this proposal have been sent under
separate cover from our San Francisco office and should
be considered as part of this proposal.
Appendices 617
N [,)g 5 9 ? 1) 30'
The following data analysis in conjunction with the Final Development Plan Rendering
dated November 21, 2006 and the Table ES -1.
T -3 Zone
Single Family Detached .
Lots
Residential
Garage
Granny
Total
Total
18' Wide
Square Feet
Square Feet
Square Feet
Units
Granny
1,800
480
149
3 Story
18' Wide
Units
100' Wide
3,500
720
0
12
0
60' Wide
3,000
480
480
50
50
T -4 Zone
Single Family Attached
Row Houses
Lots
Residential
Square Feet
Garage Square
Feet
Total
Units
2 Story
18' Wide
1,500
220
109
122
25' Wide
1,800
480
149
3 Story
18' Wide
1,800
220
43
0
25' Wide
2,200
480
74
Single Family Detached
Lots
Residential
Square Feet
Garage
Square Feet
Granny
Square Feet
Total
Residential
Units
Total
Granny
Units
40' Wide
2,000
480
480
122
122
30' Wide
1,500
480
0
91
_
0
25' Wide
1,000
0
0
24_
0
T -5 Zone
Single Family Attached
Row Houses
Lots
Residential
Garage
Total
S uare Feet
Square Feet
Units _
3 Story_
_
18' Wide _
1,800
220
_ 8
25' Wide
2,200
480
7
T -5 Zone
(E) Building 1 = 249,752 Square Feet Office before split
Building IA
Building Square
Building - lB
Building Square
1St. thru 3".
Footage
Floor
Footage
I". Floor Office
221994
0. & 2nd. Floor
22 Units @ 34,741
Floor
13,200
Townhouses
1St. Floor Retail
14,318
1St. Floor Common
4,296
Parking Garage
Area
1St. Floor Parking
30 Spaces @ 12,881
1St. Floor Parking
19 Spaces @ 11,072
Garage
Garage
1St. Floor Common
5,292
-
Area
Interstitial Area
11,003 removed
Interstitial Area
11,003 removed
2° . Floor Condo's
25 Units 42,444
3` . Floor Condo's
16 units P, 24,592
2° . Floor Common
14,767
3` . Floor Common
10,882
Area
Area
Total Square
112,696
Total Square
85,583
Footage Remaining
Footage Remaining
(E) Building 1 Loading Docks to be removed 11,000 Square Feet
(E) Building 1 Energy Center to remain 13,737 Square Feet
(E) Building 2 1 Story 130,000 Square Feet of Office to Remain
(E) Building 2 12,075 Square Feet of Chemical Storage building to be Removed.
(E) Building 3 1 Story 80,000 Square Feet of Warehouse
& 31,000 Square feet of Office
(E) Building 3
Building
Square Footage
1St. thru 3".
21 units @
Floor
52,800
Townhouses
tSt. thrn 3`d. --
Floor
13,200
Common Area
1St. thru 3`d.
Floor
110,220
Parking Garage
Total new
building Square
176,220
Footage
T -5 Zone
(E) Building 4
(E) Recycle Center/ warehouse 4,000 Square Feet to Remain
Mixed Use Buildings
#
Square Footage
I". Floor
64,128
Office
Floor
Interstitial
12,279
/Common Area
2 -3
2° . Floor
61,371
Office
1
Total Square
137,778
Footage.
Common
(E) Recycle Center/ warehouse 4,000 Square Feet to Remain
Mixed Use Buildings
#
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
of
#
# 1
2 -3
2 -3
2 -3
Floors
1
Square
Multi-
Square
Common
feet
Family
Feet
Area
#
Square
Units
Feet
3
Retail
11,400
18
18,240
4,560
3
Retail
13,620
21
21,792
5,448
3
Retail
14,940
23
23,904
5,976
3
Retail_
12,300
19
19,680
4,920
3
Retail
13,740
21
21,984
5,496
T -5 Zone
Mixed Use Building
#
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
Floor
of
#
#1
#1
#2
92
#3
93
#4
#4
#5
#5
Floors
1
Square
Common
&
Common
&
Common
&
Common
&
Common
Feet
Area
Square
Area
Square
Area
Square
Area
Square
Area
Square
Feet
Square
Feet
Square
Feet
Square
Feet
Square
Feet
Feet
Feet
Feet
Feet
61
Garage
Garage
Garage
Garage
Spaces
2,241
58
55
.134
@
Spaces
-
Spaces
2,525
Spaces
-
-
-
29,930
@
@
@
29,000
30,134
47,885
5
Multi-
Multi-
Multi -
Family
Family
Family
-
-
-
10
5,309
-
-
27
10,412
33
52,408
Units
Units
Units
@
@
@
22,172
33,147
53,361
Grocery
-
-
Store
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
45,000
T -5 Zone
Multi- Family
#
of
Floors
Floor
1 -3
Multi-
Family
#
Units
Floor
1 -3
Square
Feet
Floor
1 -3
Common
Area
Square
Feet
3
12
12,960
3,240
3
24
25,680
6,420
3
21
23,160
5,790
3
30
32,400
8,100
3
6
5,520
1,380
3
6
5,760
1,440
3
72
87,648
21,912
3
39
38,880
9,720
3
21.
22,320
5,580
3
45
45,600
11,400
3
24
24,000
6,000
3
21
20,760
5,190
3
21
20,760
5,190
3
30
30,480
7,620
3
66
66,600
16,650
3
27
27,480
6,870
3
24
24,000
6,000
3
12
13,200
3,300
3
48
50,400
12,600
3
60
61,440
15,360
3
18
17,640
4,410
3
12
1.2,960
3,240 - -'
T -6 Zone
Mixed. use Buildings
# Of
Floor #1
Floor 1
Floors
Floors 2
Common
Parking
Other
Other
Floors
Square
2 thru 5
thru 5
Area
1 thru 3
Use
Use
Foot
Square
2 thru5
Floors &
Square
Foot
Square
Feet
Feet
Multi -
5
Retail
10,000
Family
32,000
8,000
-
-
-
20 Units
Hotel
7
Retail
13,000
100 rooms
-
-
-
-
-
2 thru 7
Multi -
5
Retail
14,800
Family
43,200
11,840
-
28 Units.
Multi -
5
Retail
15,000
Family
48,000
12,000
-
-
-
32 Units
Multi-
5
Retail
12,000
Family
361000
9,600
-
-
-
25 Units
Multi -
5
Retail
35,200
Family
50,000
12,000
69,000
Gym
30,000
2 thru 3
4 thru 5
— --
23 Units
- --
-
J
(E) Building 3 1 Story 80,000 Square Feet of Warehouse
& 31,000 Square feet of Office Converting 25,000 Square Feet to Theatre.
(E) Cafeteria at 21,000 Square Feet to be removed
CS Zone
5,000 Square Feet of Office
10,000 Square Feet of Retail
CB Zone
Civic building is 35,000 Square Feet
8
N:\Maureen \Environmental Studies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village. Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
Cost
Figure 9 -1 illustrates EIP /PBS &J's cost estimate, by
task, to prepare the Sonoma Mountain Village EIR.
Total costs through preparation of the Final EIR and
WSA are estimated to be a maximum of $400,423. This
cost includes $253,016 through preparation of the
Administrative Draft EIR (Tasks 1, 2, and 3); $45,859
for preparing the Administrative Draft, Draft and
amended WSA prior to adoption (Task 4); $37,184 to
prepare the Draft EIR (Task 5); $2,303 to prepare the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Task
6); $24,515 for meetings and hearings (Task 7); and
$37,546 to prepare the Administrative Final and Final
EIR (Task 8). All costs include sub - consultant fees; field
inspections, data searches and data review; project
administration; printing and related expenses.
Factors that could increase the scope of work and
estimated cost include in -depth analysis of key issues
in addition to those identified in this proposal;
changes in the project or scope of work requiring
reanalysis or rewriting of report sections; comments
on the Administrative Draft EIR, Administrative
Draft WSA, and Administrative Final EIR requiring
more staff time than budgeted (one round of City
staff comments is budgeted for on the Administrative
Draft EIR, .Administrative Draft WSA, Draft WSA
and Administrative Final EIR); significant deficiencies
in available data requiring new and original research;
or printing additional copies of the Draft EIR, WSA
and Final EIR. These items can be renegotiated, if
required.
Our cost estimate is valid for a period of 90 days from
the date of this submittal. All work is proposed to
be performed on a time - and - materials, not -to- exceed
basis upon the completion of contract negotiations
and the submittal of monthly billings. EIP /PBS &J
labor costs are based on our standard hourly billing
rates, a schedule of which is attached.
Cost 53
D4:1093.97:0307
Proposal to. Prepare an Envirormiental Iistpaet Report (E.III) for the Patterson Ranch Planned. District
EIP, a division of PBS &J
California Science and Planning
HOURLY BILLING RATES AND JOB CLASSIFICATIONS
Senior Division Manager/ Principal Technical Professional $190 - $260 /hour
Senior Program Manager/ Senior Project Director/ Senior Planner IV/
Senior Scientist IV $175 - $220 /hour
Program Manager / Senior Environmental Manager III/ Project Director/
Senior Planner III/ Senior Scientist 111 $150 - $190 1hour
Senior Environmental Manager/ Senior Planner II/ Senior Scientist II/
Senior Engineer II $120 - $160 /hour
Associate Environmental Manager /Associate Planner/ Senior Scientist 1 $95 - $125 /hour
Environmental Specialist / Planner II/ Scientist II $85 - $110 /hour
Environmental Analyst / Planner I/ Scientist I $65 -$90/hour
Senior Administrator $90 - $120/hour
Senior Word Processor $75 $100 /hour
Word Processor $65 - $90 /hour
Administrative $55 - $80 /1710111
Technical Aide I /Technical Intern I $45 - $65 /hour
Mileage $.485 /mile
In addition, ideticifiable, non - salary costs that are directly attributable to the project (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, auto rentals, printing
and copies, graphic materials, phone charges, equipment and specialized computer charges, etc.) and subcontractor fees include a 15%
administration charge to cover overhead and adrniniscracion.
1. This schedule is effective until January 1, 2008 and is subject to annual and /or periodic revisions thereafter, as necessary to
accommodate inflationary trends, salary adjustments, and the general costs of business.
2. Invoices will be submitted by Consultant monthly. Client will notify Consultant, in writing, of any objections to an invoice
within ten (10 days) of the date of invoice. Otherwise, the invoice shall be deemed acceptable by the Client. Amounts indicated
on invoices are due and payable immediately upon receipt.
3. A late payment finance charge at a rate of 18% per annum (or the maximum amount allowed per law if lower) will be applied to
any unpaid balance commencing 30 days after the date of the original invoice.
4. Fees for litigation and expert witness services will be charged at $450.00 per hour with a 4 -hour minimum per day.
4 Cost
D4: 1093.97:0307
Figure 9 -1: Sonoma'Mountain village EIR
Cost Estimate "`
EXHIBIT "C"
Insurance Agreements
Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain insurance
in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply
with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here,
Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant
acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the
minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits
and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to
City.
Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance:
General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy
form CG 20 10 11 85 or other form(s) acceptable to the City. Defense costs must be paid in addition to
limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another.
Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 0001 including symbol 1 (Any
Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less that $1,000,000
per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non -owned auto
endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees
will use personal autos in anyway on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto
liability coverage for each such person.
Workers Compensation on a state - approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law
with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease.
Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall
provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage
provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary
coverage above a maximum $25,000 self - insured retention for liability not covered by primary but
covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf" basis, with defense costs
payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time
insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no
cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another.
Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, subconsultants or others
involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt
of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than
$1,000,000 per occurrence.
Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy
form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the consultant and
"Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed
under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate.
The policy must "pay on behalf of the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's
duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement.
Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted
carriers in the state of California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A- or better and a minimum
financial size VII.
9
N:AMaureen \ Env iron mental Studies \RFP's \Sonoma Mtn VillageARFP & UP Contract \So Mtn Village. Agreement for Services. Flnal..DOC
General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and City
agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant
1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage
required herein to include as additional insureds the City, its elected officials, employees and
agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 20 10 11 85 with an edition prior to 1992 or
other form(s) acceptable to the City. Consultant also agrees to require all contractors, and
subcontractors to do likewise.
2. No liability coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit
Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation
prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the
applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to
do likewise.
3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this
agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this
Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application
of such insurance coverage.
4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they
include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and
approved of in writing.
5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so-
called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an
employee of the insured or of any contractor or subcontractor.
6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional
requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in
scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period)
that may' affect City's protection without City's prior written consent.
7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance
evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to
Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of
this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in
the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided,
City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its
interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by
City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due
Consultant, at City option.
8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any
cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates
to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of
cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being
required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate.
9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be
10
N: \Maureen \Environmental StudiesTFP'S \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & UP Contract \So Mtn Village.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary,
noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City..
10. Consultant agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project
who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum
insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such
coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in
conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all
agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City
for review.
11. Consultant agrees not to self - insure or to use any self - insured retentions or deductibles on any
portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any
contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved
in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self - insure its
obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self- insured
retention, the deductible or self - insured retention must be declared to the City. At that time
the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination
of the deductible or self - insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions.
12. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts
and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written
notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant,
the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City.
13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have
been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be
in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement.
14. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to
inform Consultant of non - compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any
additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other
regard.
15. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or
agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This
obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason.
Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that
effect.
16. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the
term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least
the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to
expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is
acceptable. A certificate of insurance and /or additional insured endorsement as required in
these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City
within five days of the expiration of the coverages.
17. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of
tl
NAMaureen\Envirotintental Studies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
Consultant. under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any, statutory
immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents.
18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended
as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage
normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for
purposes of clarification only as.. it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party
or insured to be limiting or all- inclusive.
19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other
provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such.
20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this
Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the
provisions of this Section..
21. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved
in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of
additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be
deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the
cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for
payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto.
22. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant
arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or
liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any
such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.
12
NAMaureen \Environmental Studies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village\RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Village. Agreement for Services. Final..DOC
CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTANT
I HEREBY CERTIFY that I, Rodney A. Jeung, am the Associate Vice President, and a
duly authorized representative of the firm of EIP Associates. (a division of PBS&.J), whose
address is 353 Sacramento Street, #1000 San Francisco, CA 94111, and that neither I nor the
above firm I represent has:
a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or
other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working
solely for me or the above consultant) to solicit to secure this Agreement.
b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ
or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the
Agreement; or
c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide
employee working solely for me or the above consultant) any fee, contribution,
donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying
out the Agreement;
Except as here expressly stated (if any);
I acknowledge that this certificate is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both
criminal and civil.
Date' Signature - Rodney A. Jeung, AICP
13
N:\ Maureen \Environmental Studies\RFP's \Sonoma Mtn Village \RFP & EIP Contract \So Mtn Vitlage.Agreement for Services. Final..DOC