2000/03/14 City Council Resolution (8)RESOLUTION NO. 2000-58
RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND CALLING FOR SEALED PROPOSALS
MAGNOLIA PARK POOL
PROJECT NO. 1999 -09
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously authorized the preparation of plans and
specifications for the construction of a swimming pool facility at Magnolia Park.
AND WHEREAS, the Planning & Community Development Department has reviewed said
plans and specifications in accordance with CEQA and determined said project COULD NOT
have a significant environmental effect and has prepared a NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
NOW, THEREFORE, said project NEGATIVE DECLARATION is adopted and sealed
proposals or bids for the installation of said improvements are hereby solicited and the City
Manager is hereby directed to publish once a week for two weeks in the Community Voice a
Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals or Bids for the installation of said improvements, referring to
the plans and specifications on file in the City offices, the first publication of which shall be at
least 14 days prior to the time fixed for opening bids.
Said sealed proposals or bids shall be delivered to the City Manager of said City on or before
2:00 p.m. on the 2nd day of May, 2000, said time being not less than 14 days from the time of
first publication of said notice. Bids will be publicly opened, examined, and. declared on said day
and hour, and referred to Council at its meeting at 6:00 p.m. on May 9, 2000.
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 14th day of March, 2000.
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
Mayor .,,_{� 1-
ATTEST:
FLORES: AYE MACKENZIE: AYf 4WLLY: AYE SPIRO: AYE VIDAK- MARTINEZ: AYE
AYES: (5) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0)
Initial Study
Applicant:
Application No.:
Date:
Lead Agency:
Initial Study Prepared by:
Review Period:
Magnolia Park 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
City of Rohnert Park
1873
January 31, 2000
City of Rohnert Park
6750 Commerce Boulevard
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
Wendie Schulenburg
Planning & Community Development Director
January 31, 2000 to February 19, 2000
1
January 31, 2000
City of Rohnert Park
Environmental Checklist Form
Project Title: Magnolia Park 25 -yard Public Swimming Pool
Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rohnert Park, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert
Park_ CA 94928 -2486
Contact Person and Phone Number: Wendie Schulenburg, (707) 588 -2243
Project Location: Magnolia Park - -1401 Middlebrook Way, Rohnert Park, CA (Attachment 1)
Proiect Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Rohnert Park, 6750 Commerce Boulevard,
Rohnert Park, CA 94928 -2486
General Plan Designation: Parks, Recreation, and Golf Facility
Zoning: R1 6,500
Description of Project: The project includes the construction of a 25 -yard swimming pool with
decking, fencing, and a 1,980 square foot building that will house the snack bar,
restrooms, and storage. Two different pool sizes (a 2,854 s.f and a 3,758 s.f.,
Attachments 3 and 2, respectively) are proposed. The final size will be determine was
bid proposals are received and final costs are determined. This analysis is based on the
larger of the two pools. The project represents Phase III of the Magnolia Park Master
Plan, which was approved by the City Council in 1993. Construction is proposed in an
area that is current and open grass field within the existing park.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The park is surrounded by single family residential
within the R1 6,500 Zone District to the north, east, and west, and multi - family residential within
the RM 2,000 Zone District to the south (Attachment 1).
Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: none
Determination:
It has been determined that the project is discretionary in nature and is not otherwise exempt
from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15051, "Criteria for Identifying the Lead Agency," it is further determined
that the City of Rohnert Park is the appropriate lead agency for this project. This Initial Study has
been prepared pursuant to the State Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970. On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project
COULD NOT have a significant effect and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
9
Signature
Wendie Schulenburg
Planning & Community Development Director
Magnolia Park 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
2
Date
City of Rohnert Park
For
January 31, 2000
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Conflict with general plan land use
X
designation or zoning?
b. Conflict with applicable environmental
X
plans or policies adopted by agencies
with jurisdiction over the project?
c. Be incompatible with existing land uses
X
in the vicinity?
d. Affect agricultural resources or
X
operations (e.g., impacts to soils or
farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
e. Disrupt or divide the physical
X
arrangement of an established
community (including low - income or
minority communities)?
a. The Zoning Ordinance allows parks and recreational public facilities as conditional uses in
the R -1 Zone District. The completion of the park project will be consistent with the Park
Master Plan, which was already approved by the City.
b. The proposed amendment would not conflict with any adopted environmental plans or
policies of either the City or Rohnert Park or any other agencies with jurisdiction or
permitting responsibilities.
c. The site is currently developed as an active park, with tennis courts, playgrounds soccer
fields. The addition of a pool will be compatible with the existing uses and serve the
recreational needs of the surrounding neighborhoods.
d. The proposed project would not impact agricultural resources.
e. The proposed project will not affect physical arrangement of land uses.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
M
January 31, 2000
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Cumulatively exceed official regional
X
or local population projections?
. ...
b. Induce substantial growth in an area
X
either directly or indirectly (e.g.,
through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially
X
affordable housing?
a. The proposed project will not affect population projections as it is intended to provide
recreational uses for the existing surrounding neighborhoods.
b. The proposed project is not growth inducing (See 2a).
c. The proposed project would not affect or displace affordable housing.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
S]
January 31, 2000
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Would the proposal result in or expose Significant Significant Significant
people to potential impacts involving: Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a. Fault rupture? 11 1 ( X
b. Seismic ground shaking? 11 1 1 X
c. Seismic ground failure, including X
liquefaction?
__.
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X
e. Landslides or mudflows? 11 1 1 1 X
f. Erosion, changes in topography or X
unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land? X
h. Expansive soils? 11 1 1 1 X
i. Unique geologic or physical features? I ( I X
a. The City of Rohnert Park is not within an Alquist -Priolo Special Studies Zone, and the risk
of fault rupture within the project site is less than significant (Sonoma County General Plan,
1989, Public Safety Element, Figure PS- Ig).
b. The closest known active fault is the Heald sburg-Rogers Creek fault, which has a surface
branch that lies about four miles to the east of the Rohnert Park city limits. The maximum
magnitude earthquake predicted for this fault is 7.1. In the event of an earthquake this size,
the City could be subject to extreme ground shaking. However, the pool will be constructed
in accordance with applicable building standards, which minimize the risk from seismic
events (Rohnert Park General Plan, 1995).
In 1995, the City adopted a Standardized Emergency Management Plan that would be
implemented in the case of a major seismic event.
c. The proposed project would not result in seismic ground failure or liquefaction.
d. The project is not located in an area where any seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazards exist.
(Rohnert Park General Plan, 1995, Safety Element)
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
61
January 31, 2000
e. Due to the City's generally flat topography, there is no potential for landslides or mudflows
within the project site. (Sonoma County General Plan, 1989, Public Safety Element, Figure
PS-1g).
f. The project would require excavation of the pool site. A soils report, which would indicate
any unstable conditions, will be required prior to construction of the pool.
g. The project would not result in subsidence of land.
h. The project would not result in expansive soils.
i. No unique geological or physical features exist on the project site.
4< WATER
I Potentially I Potentially I Less Than
Significant I Significant I Significant
Would the ro n osal result in: Impact Unless I Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage X
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff?
.. _ ..................... ... _... .
b. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
c. Discharge into surface waters or other
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen, or
turbidity)?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water
in any body?
e. Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements?
f. Changes in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or
through substantial loss of groundwater
recharge capability?
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
I
No Impact
V
X
X
X
X
January 31, 2000
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of I I ( X
groundwater?
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? 11 1 1 1 X
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of X
groundwater otherwise available for
public water supplies?
a. The proposed project will replace existing permeable surfaces with a non - permeable facility.
This could create a minor change in the current amount of runoff from the site. However,
considering the park and adjacent school yard is approximately 18 acres of predominately
grass fields, the potential increased runoff will be absorb by the surrounding permeable
ground and thus is a less than significant impact.
b. The proposed project will not expose people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding. Specific project level water resource impacts would be analyzed on a, case by case
basis.
c. The proposed project will not result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity). Specific project level
water resource impacts would be analyzed on a case by case basis.
d. See 4.a.
e. The proposed project will not result in any changes in water currents or the course and
direction of marine or fresh water. Specific project level water resource impacts would be
analyzed on a case by case basis.
f. The proposed project will not affect ground water quality or quantity. Specific project level
water resource impacts would be analyzed on a case by case basis.
g. See 4f.
h. See 4f.
i. See 4f.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
7
January 31, 2000
5. AIR QUALITY
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Violate any air quality standard or
X
contribute to an existing or projected
air quality violation?
........ ......... ....... _. ... ....................
_._ .._
__.
.........
b. Expose sensitive receptors to
X
pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture, or
X
temperature, or cause any change in
climate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
X
5a - 5c. Other than short -term construction- related air quality impacts; the proposed project
would neither have any affect on air quality or movements nor create objectionable odors. It is
an augmentation of the existing park uses. The project will be required to comply with standard
construction conditions, which require erosion control and dust suppression.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool January 31. 2000
Negative Declaration
6. TRANSPORTATION / CIRCULATION
Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact Unless Impact
Would the proposal result in: Mitigation
Incorporated
a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic I X
congestion?
b. Hazards to safety from design features I X
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access X
to nearby uses?
d. Insufficient parking or capacity on -site j X
or off-site?
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or X
bicyclists?
.... . .......... ........................... .. _. ....... _ ............... .. ... ....... ......
f. Conflicts with adopted policies X
supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? 11 1 1 1 X
a. Although the park is a neighborhood .facility, the addition of the pool could result in an
incremental increase in the amount of trips to the park area. However, the park facility was
included in the original EIR prepared for the M- Section annexation and development and
was considered when original trip generations were developed and mitigated through road
design and placement.
b: See 6a.
c. See 6a.
d. With 140 on -site parking spaces, the park has sufficient on -site parking for normal, nonevent,
park parking. The city does not have a parking standard for parks, but public pools require
one space for each 100 s.f. of pool area. Based on this ratio, 38 parking stalls would be
required for the use. Based on the master plan, there is sufficient on -site parking (and
additional off -site parking) available to serve the use.
e. and f. The park was design to facility neighborhood use, including bicycle /pedestrian traffic.
a. N/A
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool January 31, 2000
Negative Declaration
9
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened, or rare species
or their habitats?
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than I No Impact
Significant
Impact
X
b. Locally - designated species X
(e.g., heritage trees)?
_ ......................................
c. Locally- designated natural X
communities (e.g., oak forest, etc.)?
_.. ....
d. Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, j X
or vernal pool)?
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration X
corridors?
a. — e.:
The site is currently a grass field within the existing park. The proposed project would not result
in any negative impacts to flora and fauna communities or habitat.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Conflict with adopted energy
X
conservation plans? .
b. Use non - renewable resources in a
X
wasteful and inefficient manner?
..__. ........
.. ...............
c. Result in the loss or availability of a
. ..... ................
_
.........
X
known mineral resource that would be
of future value to the region and the
residents of the State?
a -c. The proposed project would not conflict with adopted energy plans, use non - renewable
resources in a wasteful manner or result in the loss or availability of known mineral resources.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool January 31. 2000
Negative Declaration
10
7e HAZARDS
Would the proposal involve:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No impact
a. A risk of accidental explosion or
Significant
Significant
Significant
X
release of hazardous substances
Impact
Unless
Impact
(including, but not limited to oil,
Mitigation
pesticides, chemical or radiation)?
Incorporated
b. Possible interference with an
X
X
emergency response plan or emergency
X
evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or
X
potential health hazard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources
X
of potential health hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with
X
flammable brush, grass, or trees?
a -b. The proposed project would neither create any health hazards nor expose people or
property to hazardous conditions.
10. NOISE
a -b. The proposed project could result in an incremental increase in park noise; however., the
pool would not create noise levels beyond the existing and adjacent ball fields.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
11
January 31, 2000
Potentially
Potentially
Less Than
No Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Unless
Impact
Would the proposal result in:
Mitigation
Incorporated
a. An increase in existing noise levels?
X
b. Exposure of people to severe noise
X
levels?
a -b. The proposed project could result in an incremental increase in park noise; however., the
pool would not create noise levels beyond the existing and adjacent ball fields.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
11
January 31, 2000
11. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the proposal have an effect upon,
Potentially
Potentially
Less Than
No Impact
or result in a need for new or altered
Significant
Impact
Significant
Unless
Significant
Impact
X
government services in any of the
Mitigation
X
following areas: +
Incorporated
X
d. Maintenance of public facilities, X
including roads?
...................... ... ....... ......... ....
e. Other governmental services? , X
a -e. The proposed project would incrementally affect public services, particularly the Public
Works and the Recreation Departments. However, these increase service levels are minimal and
were assumed when the park master plan and funding; were approved.
12. UTLITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the proposal result in a need for
new systems or supplies or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Imp
Potentially
Significant
Unless
. Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than I
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Electrical power or natural gas?
X
b. Communications systems?
X
c. Local or regional water treatment or
X
distribution facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
X
e. Storm water drainage?
X
f. Solid waste disposal?
X
g. Local or regional water supplies?
X
a -g. The project would not result in any impacts to utility and service system.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool January 31, 2000
Negative Declaration
12
13. AESTHETICS
Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic
highway?
........
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic
effect?
.-I ... ........
c. Create light or glare?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than I No Impact
Significant
Impact
M
0
X
a -c. The proposal would not affect the aesthetic quality of the park or neighborhood. The
swimming pool is consistent with the existing park uses and would not create any additional light
or glare beyond the levels currently in the park.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
X
... _ .. .. _
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
.......
X
c. Affect historical resources?
X
d. Have the potential to cause a physical
X
change that would affect unique ethnic
cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred
X
uses within the potential impact area?
a -e. The proposal would not affect cultural resources.
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Neaative Declaration
13
January 31, 2000
15: RECREATION
a -b. The proposal would augment the existing recreational opportunities in the community.
Sources
City of Rohnert Park General Plan (1995)
City of Rohnert Park General Plan Land Use Map
Draft City of Rohnert Park General Plan (1998)
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
E
City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code
County of Sonoma General Plan (1989)
City of Rohnert Park Zoning Map
January 31, 2000
Potentially
Potentially
Less Than
No Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Would the proposal• '
Impact
unless
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood
X
or regional parks or other recreational
facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational
X
opportunities?
a -b. The proposal would augment the existing recreational opportunities in the community.
Sources
City of Rohnert Park General Plan (1995)
City of Rohnert Park General Plan Land Use Map
Draft City of Rohnert Park General Plan (1998)
Magnolia 25 -Yard Pool
Negative Declaration
E
City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code
County of Sonoma General Plan (1989)
City of Rohnert Park Zoning Map
January 31, 2000
Vicinity Map
NORTH
Address: 1401 Initial Study Date: 1/31/00
Middlebrook way Magnolia Park 25 -Yard Pool
Scale: No Scale File No.: 1873
Attachment 1
,D-- �)
433( T G
(E) MH.
O RIM 140 -c
l-� I E:7) E�7) L® E3 FZI�) 0 0 i<-,-
l�
140.93 T.G.
O GATGH BA51N
141.50 T.O.
IN
J, iJ J S.74-, x)00/
/"- (C) f" If1.
/0 RIM 140.0.851
� I
Y
T.G.
0
q i
(E) GATGH
� 141.50 T.G.
BASIN
-
a
RAD-
/1
45' -0" —
-3"
_75' -O"
q. -5" q 3„
x
/
�
_
/
-
FOOL
145.61 T.G.
I
/
\
�
2
144.0 (TYP. ® DEGK EDGE)
9
143.5 T.6.
� x � G
�
U
�n
X ,` ,--n
B L D G
(5EE Al)
2
X x
— I44 --
x
F.F. ELEV. 144.02'
m
-
2
-
144.00 T.G.
8 --- C4� --�-