2000/07/25 City Council Resolution (12)RESOLUTION No. 2000 -154
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
SUBMITTTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY AN ORDINANCE MAKING
AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
INCLUDING ESTABLISHING A 20 YEAR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
WHEREAS, the voters approved an amendment to the General Plan of the City of
Rohnert Park in November of 1996 establishing an urban growth boundary; and
WHEREAS, the urban growth boundary established by the voters in November of
1996 expired by its own terms on July 1, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park has determined that the
voters of the City of Rohnert Park are best to decide whether the general plan of the City
of Rohnert Park should be amended to establish a twenty -year urban growth boundary to
replace the urban growth boundary that expired on July 1, 2000; and
WHEREAS, Urban Growth Boundary proposed for submittal to the voters as a
ballot measure by this resolution is defined as part of the project that is the subject of the
Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000; and
WHEREAS, this measure is submitted to the voters of the City of Rohnert Park
pursuant to the authorization provided by Elections Code § 9222.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rohnert Park that (1) the urban growth boundary included in the ordinance to be
submitted to the voters of the City of Rohnert Park as a ballot measure by this resolution
was included as part of the project that is the subject of the Environmental Impact Report
(SCH No. 99062114) prepared for the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000; and (2) that
Resolution No. 2000 -152 that certified the final Environmental Impact Report prepared
for the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 and made certain findings, is attached to this
Resolution as Exhibit B and each of the findings and all of the evidence included within
Resolution 2000 -152 is incorporated into this resolution as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rohnert Park that a special municipal election is hereby called on November 7, 2000, at
which the following question will be submitted to the registered voters of the City of
Rohnert Park:
Shall the voters of Rohnert Park amend the General Plan to make the Urban Growth
Boundary effective for 20 years so as to prevent urban sprawl, protect community separators,
preserve agricultural land and open space, and control the amount and rate of growth to
conform to the new General Plan, be spread evenly over 20 years, and provide that no
change can be made to the Urban Growth Boundary measure unless approved by the voters?
A complete copy of the ordinance which is the General Plan Amendment establishing the
20 Year Growth Boundary is attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution.
Rh. JLUTION NO. 2000 -154
(Page 2 of 2)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to transmit a
certified copy of this resolution to the Board of Supervisors and to the County Clerk to
include in the Ballot for the November 7, 2000, consolidated primary election.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to Elections Code section 10403,
the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park requests that the Board of Supervisors
consolidate the special municipal election on this measure with the General Municipal
Election to be conducted on November 7, 2000 and any other election held on the same
day within the City of Rohnert Park.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park
requests that the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors permit the County Elections
Official and the elections department of Sonoma County to prepare all required notices
and election materials for the holding of the special municipal election, give all such
required notices and send to the City's registered voters all required election materials,
conduct the special municipal election and canvass the vote received, and take all steps
necessary and required for the holding of the general municipal election within the City
of Rohnert Park.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Rohnert Park recognizes that
additional costs will be incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees
to reimburse the County for such costs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park,
in accordance with the provisions of Elections Code section 9285(b) hereby repeals any
previous adoption of the provisions of Elections Code section 9285(b), and the Council
hereby permits rebuttal arguments, as described in Elections Code section 9285(a), on the
measure to be placed on the ballot under the provisions of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to transmit a
certified copy of the attached ordinance to the City Attorney, who shall prepare an
impartial analysis of the same. The City Attorney is authorized to prepare the ballot title
and a summary of the measure if a summary is necessary.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to transmit a
certified copy of this resolution to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, the County
Clerk and the elections department of the County of Sonoma.
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED by the Rohnert Park City Council this
25th day of July , 2000.
��. � 0'.
ATTEST: MAYOR Vicki Vidak- Martinez
�.
VICE MAYOR ) Jake Mackenzie
W-A
FLORES: AYE MACKENZIE: AYE REILLY: AYE SPIRO: AYE VIDAK- MARTINEZ: AYE
AYES: (5) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0)
EXHIBIT "A"
TO
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -154
Ordinance No.
An Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park
Amending the City of Rohnert Park General Plan by Establishing an Urban
Growth Boundary
Section A. The People of the City of Rohnert Park hereby adopt the following
amendment to the text and maps of the land use element of the General Plan of the City
of Rohnert Park. It is in intent of the People of the City of Rohnert Park that Sections 1
through 4 are each part of the amendment to the General Plan adopted by this measure.
TWENTY -YEAR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
Section 1. Purpose and Findings
1.1 This measure reaffirms and readopts the City of Rohnert Park's commitment to
planned growth through the designation of an urban growth boundary. This measure
establishes the City of Rohnert Park's Urban Growth Boundary ( "UGB ") as depicted on
the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A as the area within which the City
generally projects that development will occur within a specified period. Until June 30,
2020, the UGB shall be changed only by a vote of the people, except in certain
circumstances and according to specific procedures set forth in this measure.
1.2 Encouraging a cohesive pattern of urbanization. Adoption of a UGB will encourage
n r.nhPC;vP nattPrn nf„rhsni7.atinn by (1) nromoting efficient and orderlv growth patterns;
(2) supporting stability and certainty in long term planning by advancing the concept of
planned growth; and (3) ensuring that lands outside the UGB are not prematurely or
unnecessarily converted to urban uses.
13 Protecting what is unique about Rohnert Park. The City of Rohnert Park is bordered
to the east and to the west by unincorporated lands that are dominated by hills, farms, and
fields. This unincorporated landscape is enjoyed by the persons who work and live in
Rohnert Park and forms a part of the environment of Rohnert Park even though it is
outside the city limits. Adoption of a UGB will preserve and protect this aspect of
Rohnert Park by requiring urbanization to stop where the unincorporated landscape
begins.
1.4 This General Plan Amendment is not intended to prevent the City from meeting its
obligation under state housing or zoning and planning law. The City's Housing Element,
including the sites identified therein for housing, and the programs and activities adopted
to promote and encourage the development of housing, will allow the City of Rohnert
Park to meet its obligations for the preservation, improvement, and development of
housing. This measure establishing a UGB is consistent with the objectives of the City's
(Page 2 of 6)
Housing Element and with the other mandatory elements of the City's General Plan. It is
fully expected that the policies and programs in the City's Housing Element, including
the sites identified therein for housing, will allow the City of Rohnert Park to meet the
requirements of State law to provide housing opportunities for all economic segments of
the community. This measure allows the City Council to bring land into the UGB
without a public vote for very low and low income housing only, in recognition of the
fact that sometimes it is necessary for a local government to take special steps to provide
opportunities for very low and low income housing.
1.5 The UGB outlines the area within which the City generally projects that development
will occur within the next twenty years. However, the General Plan of the City of
Rohnert Park Growth Management Policies prohibit growth from commencing, if the
necessary public facilities — streets, water, wastewater, solid waste, and parks — are not in
place when the growth is completed. In addition, the General Plan of the City of Rohnert
Park Specific Plan Policies require that new growth will not be permitted unless and until
the specific plan for the area in which the growth is proposed, has been adopted.
Section 2 Establishing the Urban Growth Boundary
The following policies shall apply to the Urban Growth Boundary:
2.1 No urban development shall be permitted beyond the Urban Growth Boundary.
"Urban development" shall mean development requiring one or more basic
municipal services including, but not limited to, water service, sewer, improved
storm drainage facilities, fire hydrants and other physical public facilities and
services; provided, however, that open space uses, parks, agricultural uses,
community fields and golf courses beyond the Urban Growth Boundary that are
provided with municipal or public services, shall not be defined as "urban
development."
2.2 The Urban Growth Boundary shall be in effect until June 30, 2020,
2.3 The Urban Growth Boundary may be amended only by a vote of the people or as
provided for in Section 2.4.
2.4 The Urban Growth Boundary may be amended by a majority vote (three affirmative
votes) of the City Council under the following circumstances:
2.4.1 Affordable Housing. To comply with state law regarding the provision of
housing for low and very -low income families, the City Council may amend the
Urban Growth Boundary in order to include within the UGB, lands to be
developed primarily (51 %) for low and very-low income families provided,
however:
(Page 3 of 6)
(a) An amendment to the UGB pursuant to this Section 2.4.1 may not be made
earlier than January 1, 2015;
(b) No more than 10 acres may be brought into the UGB in any calendar year;
(c) If in any year, fewer than 10 acres are brought within the UGB, then the
unused increment, up to a maximum of 5 acres, may be brought within the
UGB in a subsequent year;
(d) Such amendment may be adopted only if the City Council makes each of the
following findings:
(i) That the land is immediately adjacent to comparably developed areas;
(ii) That there is no existing residentially designated land available within
the UGB that can feasibly accommodate'the proposed development;
(iii) That it is not reasonably feasible to accommodate the proposed
development by redesignating lands within the UGB for housing;
(iv) That there has been an application submitted to provide housing
primarily for low and very -low income families, and the applicant has
provided substantial evidence that sufficient and adequate capacity is
available in all city services and facilities, all school district facilities,
and any other relevant public agency facilities, to accommodate the
proposed development.
(v) That the application to provide housing primarily for low and very -low
income families is consistent with GM -4 in General Plan 2000.
For purposes of this section, the concept of "feasibility" shall include
considerations of market feasibility, environmental feasibility, and other rules and
regulations affecting the development of the property.
2.4.2 To adjust the UGB exclusively for the purpose of protecting agricultural or open
space lands.
2.4.3 To add lands exclusively to protect natural resources.
2.4.4 To add lands exclusively to be maintained as public parks or public open space.
2.4.5 To add lands to provide exclusively for the disposal of treated wastewater and /or
sewage treatment and disposal use.
2.5 This General Plan Amendment is not intended, and shall not be applied or construed,
to authorize the City to exercise its powers in a manner which will take private
property for public use without the payment of just compensation. This General Plan
Amendment will be interpreted, applied and implemented so as to accomplish its
purposes to the maximum permissible extent, by all constitutional means. If the
application of this General Plan Amendment to a specific property would take
private property for public use without the payment of just compensation ( "taking "),
then the City Council may take any action necessary to avoid a taking.
(Page 4 of 6)
2.6 This General Plan Amendment is not intended, and shall not apply to any
development project that has obtained as of the effective date of this resolution, a vested
right pursuant to state law.
Section 3 Amending the General Plan to Manage Growth within the Urban Growth
Boundary
3.1. The UGB establishes the area within which urban development will be contained
until the year 2020. This limitation restricts development to lands within the UGB.
Such restriction is necessary to implement and to be consistent with the following
community goals:
3.1.1 Efficient and orderly growth patterns.
3.1.2 A well - designed mix of residential, commercial, business park, and open space
uses, featuring a pedestrian- oriented community focal point with a small town, village -
like character.
3.1.3 Stability and certainty in long term planning through planned growth.
3.1.4 Adequate and efficient delivery of public services and facilities.
3.2 In order to manage development within the UGB in a manner that is consistent with
these community goals, a growth management program shall be adopted that
includes each of the following components:
3.2.1 An annual standard to determine the number of residential development approvals
that are consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan.
3.2.2 A requirement to implement the growth management program, including the
annual standard in a manner that is consistent with the goals, objectives, obligations and
policies of the City's Land Use and Housing Elements.
3.2.3. An average approximate one percent (1 %) annual population growth rate.
3.2.4. An annual review by the City Council to determine the consistency of each of the
components of the growth management program with the goals, plans, and policies of the
General Plan and State housing, planning, and zoning law.
3.2.5 A requirement to coordinate the development in each of the specific plan areas with
the growth management ordinance.
Housing that is affordable to very low and low income households shall be exempt from
the growth management program.
Section 4 Conforming General Plan Amendments
4.1 Land Use Map Amendments. The General Plan Land Use Map of the City of
Rohnert Park, adopted December 12, 1995 (as amended through June 2, 1998), is
amended to depict the Urban Growth Boundary as follows:
(Page 5 of 6)
4.1.1 Amend the "Map Legend" by adding the term "20 Year Urban Growth
Boundary."
4.1.2 Amend the General Plan Land Use Map by adding a line designating the 20 Year
Urban Growth Boundary as depicted on Exhibit A to this ordinance and as
confirmed by the metes and bounds description provided on Exhibit B to this
ordinance.
4.2 Land Use Element Text Amendments. The Land Use Element of the City of Rohnert
Park adopted December 12, 1995, is amended as follows:
4.2.1 Amend Section 2.17, page 2:27 to add a definition of "20 Year Urban Growth
Boundary" (Definition 15) to read as follows:
20 YEAR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
This is the area within which urban development will be contained over the period
2000 to 2020.
4.2.2 Amend Section 2.18, page 2:29, Policy No. 2 by adding the language that is
underlined:
Areas in the City Planning area, outside the Urban Growth Boundary, should be
maintained in agricultural and open space uses consistent with the land use
designation in the Sonoma County General Plan.
4.3 If the City Council of the City of-Rohnert Park approves a resolution adopting
General Plan 2000 for the City of Rohnert Park, on or before the effective date of the
ballot measure adopting these amendments to the general plan, then the amendments
made by this Section 4 to the 1995 General Plan shall be made to the corresponding
appropriate sections and pages of General Plan 2000,
Section 5. If the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park approves a resolution adopting
General Plan 2000 for the City of Rohnert Park, on or before the effective date of the
ballot measure adopting these amendments, then Sections 1 — 3 of this Ordinance shall
replace Policy GM (Growth Management) - 2 of General Plan 2000 in its entirety.
Section 6. Amendment or Repeal. Except as otherwise provided herein, no part of this
General Plan Amendment may be amended or repealed except by a vote of the voters of
the City of Rohnert Park at a regularly scheduled general election or at a special election
called for that purpose.
(Page 6 of 6)
Section B. Interpretation. This measure shall be interpreted so as to be consistent with
all federal and state laws, rules, and regulations. This measure shall be broadly construed
and interpreted in order to achieve the purposes stated herein.
Section C. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect November 8, 2000 if a
majority of the voters, voting on the resolution, vote in favor of its adoption at the general
municipal election to be held on November 7, 2000. Upon the effective date of this
ordinance, the provisions of Sections 1 through 4 of Section A are hereby inserted into
the General Plan of the City of Rohnert Park as an amendment thereof. At such time as
this general plan amendment is inserted into the City of Rohnert Park General Plan, any
provisions of the City of Rohnert Park Zoning Ordinance or any other ordinances of the
City of Rohnert Park inconsistent with this general plan amendment, shall not be
enforced.
Section D. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of
this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.
The voters hereby declare that they would have passed and adopted this resolution, and
each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more of the provisions,
either alone or as applied in connection with other provisions, may be declared invalid.
APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE OF THE PEOPLE ON NOVEMBER 7,
2000.
U -y
NO
Adopted by declaration of the vote by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park on
2000.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT "A"
0 3000 6000
LEGEND
— — — — — — — — EXIST. CITY LIMITS
—' PROPOSED U.G.B.
MAP 1 PROPOSED CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY, 2000 - 2020
NORTH
2000UGB.dwg
EXHIBIT B
20 YEAR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Beginning at a point on the existing city boundary of the City of Rohnert Park, said point being
the most northeasterly corner of Rohnert Park Annexation No. 1; thence, along the existing city
boundary, South 0 °06' East, 2620.66 feet, to the intersection of said existing boundary and the
northerly prolongation of the east line of that parcel shown as 45- 222 -04 on the County
Assessor's Parcel Map, Sonoma County, California; thence South 0° 15' East, 40 feet, more or
less, to the northeast corner of said parcel 45- 222 -04; thence, along the east line of said parcel,
South 0'15' East, 1,325.94 feet, to the southeast corner of said parcel, said corner being the
northeast corner of that parcel shown as 45- 222 -14 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map;
thence, along the east line of said parcel 45- 222 -14, South 0° 15' East, 660 feet, to the southeast
corner of said parcel, said corner being the northeast corner of that parcel shown as 45- 222 -10 on
said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence, along the east line of said parcel 45- 222 -10, South
0° 15' East, 665.94 feet, to the southeast corner of said parcel, said corner being the northwest
corner of that parcel shown as 45- 261 -01 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence South
41 °56' East, 1,330 feet, more or less, to the northerly bank of Crane Creek as it existed in 1998;
thence generally easterly along said northerly bank, 1,800 feet, more or less, to a point that is 500
feet west of the centerline of Petaluma Hill Road, a public road; thence, parallel to said centerline,
South, 3,340 feet, more or less, to a point on the north right of way for Rohnert Park
Expressway, a public street; thence, along said north right of way and the prolongation thereof,
550 feet, more or less, to a point on the east right of way for said Petaluma Hill Road; thence,
along said east right of way, South, 12,100 feet, more or less, to the intersection of said east right
of way and the easterly prolongation of the south right of way for Valley House Drive; thence,
along said south right of way, West 550 feet; thence, parallel to the centerline of said Petaluma
Hill Road, South 1,680 feet, more or less, to the south line of that parcel shown as 47- 111 -50 on
said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence, along said south line, 1,850 feet, more or less, to a
point on the existing city boundary, said point being the most southeasterly corner of Rohnert
Park Annexation No. 6; thence, continuing along the existing city boundary, the following
courses:
South 87 °19' West, 1452.50 feet;
South 0° 22' West, 786.00 feet;
West, 35.00 feet;
North 19 °13' West, 967.95 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, 686.91 feet;
North 26 °03' West, 30.00 feet;
North 89 °44' West, 1297.56 feet;
North 26 °33' West, 425.04 feet;
North 89 °44' West, 574.86 feet;
North 26 °33' West, 726.00 feet;
North 89 °44' West, 232.98 feet;
North 25 °42' West, 2704.46 feet;
Page 1
North 61 °55' East, 1380.45 feet;
South 26°15' West, 1541.61 feet;
North 63 °45' West, 560.00 feet;
North 26 °15' West, 518.07 feet;
North 89°17' East, 477,00 feet;
North 21°15' West, 1366.20 feet;
North 40 °25' West, 256.80 feet;
North 48 039' East, 162.20 feet;
North 26 °03' West, 744.00 feet;
South 63 °57' West, 640.00 feet;
South 26 °03' East, 420 feet, more or less;
South 62 °07'00" West, 709.43 feet;
South 27 °53'00" East, 435.00 feet;
South 62 °07'00" West, 680.00 feet;
North 27 °53'00" West, 435.00 feet;
South 62 °07'00" West, 100.00 feet;
South 27 °53'00" East, 435.00 feet;
South 62 °07'00" West, 400.00 feet;
North 27 053'00" West, 435.00 feet;
South 62 °32'20" West, 1893.50 feet;
North 33 °48'40" West, 66.34 feet;
North 16 °18'40" West, 200.81 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave. southwesterly, 197.78 feet;
North 59 053'40" West, 191.83 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, 149.66 feet;
North 31`'34'40" West, 293.64 feet;
North 12 °37'40" West, 280.49 feet;
North 64 °52'00" East, 331.05 feet;
North 25 °08'00" West, 864.92 feet;
South 64 °52'00" West, 423.71 feet;
North 14 °48'40" West, 205.71 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, 113.79 feet;
North 33 °18'40" West, 179,61 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, 175.29 feet;
North 61 048'40" West, 351.49 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southerly, 141.46 feet;
North 84 °48'40" West, 256.23 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave northerly, 116.97 feet; along a compound curve,
concave northeasterly, 105.32 feet;
South 41 °47'00" West, 58.48 feet;
North 21°31'06" West, 40.00 feet;
North 29°31'06" West, 53.14 feet;
North 0 °05'26" West, 352.47 feet;
South 89 °54'34" West, 167.00 feet;
North 0 °05'26" West, 1925.59 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave westerly, 226.64 feet;
Page 2
North 89 058'48 " West, 2509 feet, more or less;
North 0 °09'34" West, 52.50 feet;
along a non - tangent curve, concave northeasterly, 523.39 feet;
North 21 °02'46" West, 1171.71 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, 952.00 feet;
North 71 °55'33" West, 1228.30 feet; along a tangent curve, concave
northeasterly, 90.84 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave northwesterly, 215.66 feet;
North 59 °45'50" West, 144.00 feet;
North 30'14'10" East, 413.03 feet;
North 29 040'20" East, 1,077.21 feet;
along a tangent curve, concave southeasterly, 207.71 feet;
North 29 °30'34" East, 1,200 feet, more or less, to the intersection of said city
boundary and the west right of way line of Langner Avenue, a public road; thence,
along said west right of way line, 2,765 feet; more or less, to the intersection of
said west right of way line and the westerly prolongation of the north line of that
parcel shown as 45- 053 -07 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence, along
said westerly prolongation, 50 feet to the northwest corner of said parcel 45 -053-
07; thence, east along the north line of said parcel 45- 053 -07, 573.16 feet to the
northeast corner of said parcel 45- 053 -07, said point also being the northwest
corner of that parcel shown as 45- 053 -13 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map;
thence, east along the north line of said parcel 45- 053 -13, 383.77 feet, to an angle
point therein, said angle point being the northwest corner of that parcel shown as
45- 053 -12 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence, east along the north line
of said parcel 45- 053 -12, 189.39 feet, to the northeast corner of said parcel 45-
053 -12, said corner being a point on the west iigiit ui way 101 Lauaul I-ANCRUe, a
public road; thence east, 50 feet, more or less, to a point on the east right of way
for said Labath Avenue, said point being the northwest corner of that parcel shown
as 45- 054 -28 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence east, along the north
line of said parcel 45- 054 -28, 543.16 feet, to the northeast corner of said parcel
45- 054 -28, said northeast corner being a point on the west line of that parcel
shown as 45- 054 -21; thence, north along said west line, 380 feet, more or less, to
the northwest corner of said parcel 45- 054 -21, said northwest corner also being
the southwest corner of that parcel shown as 45- 054 -14 on said County Assessor's
Parcel Map; thence north, along the west line of said parcel 45- 054 -14, 380 feet,
to the northwest corner of said parcel, said corner also being the southwest corner
of that parcel shown as 45- 054 -30 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence
north, along the west line of said parcel 45- 054 -30, 380 feet to the northwest
corner of said parcel, said corner also being the southeast corner of that parcel
shown as 45- 054 -01 on said County Assessor's Parcel Map; thence north, along
the east line of said parcel 45- 054 -01, 380 feet, to the northeasterly corner of said
parcel, said corner being a point on the south right of way for Millbrae Avenue, a
public road; thence north, 50 feet, to the north right of way for said Millbrae
Avenue, thence east, along said north right of way, 1,150 feet, more or less, to a
point on the existing city boundary, said point being the northwest corner of
Page 3
Rohnert Park Reorganization No. 10; thence, along the existing city boundary the
following courses:
South 89 °34'56" East, 574.91 feet;
South 25 °40'19" East, 1,068.73 feet;
South 0'09'15" West, 158.65 feet;
South 45 °31' 19" East, 164.44 feet;
North 6 056156" East, 534.82 feet;
along a nontangent curve, concave southwesterly, 675.74 feet;
North 72 °49'59" East, 200.00 feet;
East, 3,024.41 feet;
South 33 °49'02" East, 17.90 feet;
North 89 °45' East, 562.20 feet;
North 89 °45' East, 261.00 feet;
North 89 °30' East, 1296.70 feet;
and North 89 °00' East, 2657.52 feet, to the Point of Beginning.
Page 4
EXHIBIT "B"
TO
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -154
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-152
A RESOLUTION OF THE ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE ROHNERT PARK
GENERAL PLAN INCLUDING A REVISED HOUSING ELEMENT, AND
CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park is required to maintain a long -
range, comprehensive, and internally- consistent General Plan, consistent with State Law;
WHEREAS, the Rohnert Park City Council adopted the Rohnert Park
General Plan by Resolution No. 95 -186 on December 12, 1995, as the official plan to
guide the future physical development of the City of Rohnert Park;
WHEREAS, on September 8; 1998, the City Council authorized
preparation of a Request for Qualifications for General Plan project consultants and
created an Ad Hoc Oversight Committee;
WHEREAS, numerous public workshops, committee meetings, and
Planning Commission and City Council study sessions have been held during the General
Plan update process;
WHEREAS, the Rohnert Park City Council had prepared a Final
Environmental Impact Report (also referred to as a Program or Final EIR and consisting
of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May 2000, and the Response to
Comments document, dated July 2000);
WHEREAS, on July 13, 2000, the Rohnert Park Planning Commission
held a public hearing on the Draft General Plan and Housing Element update and
recommended approval of the Public Review Draft General Plan, May 2000, and the
Public Review Draft Housing Element, May 2000, with a number of revisions (General
Plan Adoption Draft pages, July 12, 2000, changes to the Housing Element dated July 5
and 10, 2000, and additional revisions made by the Planning Commission), and
recommended certification of the Final EIR;
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2000, the Rohnert Park City Council held a
public hearing on the Public Review Draft General Plan and Housing Element, and the
Planning Commission's recommended revisions to the General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Rohnert Park, California, has reviewed and considered the Final Program
Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan together with comments received
during the public review process;
1
RE: .UTION NO. 2000 -152
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Rohnert Park, California, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the
Planning Commission and the Public Review Draft General Plan, May 2000, together
with the comments received during the public hearing process and such other related
information as was presented to the Council and accordingly, certifies, adopts, states,
finds, and approves as follows:
1. That said City Council pursuant to Section 15090 of the State CEQA
Guidelines hereby certifies that, as stated in Exhibit "A" (attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference), that (a) it has reviewed and considered
the information contained in the pertinent Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) described above prior to reaching a decision on the comprehensive
update of the Rohnert Park General Plan; (b) said FEIR has been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended, and
the State CEQA Guidelines; and (c) the FEIR reflects the City Council's
independent judgement and analysis.
2. That said City Council hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public
Resources Code of the State of California and Sections 15091 of the State
CEQA Guidelines, that changes or alterations have been required in, or can be
incorporated into, the comprehensive update of the Rohnert Park General Plan
which will mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects as identified
in the Final EIR for the reasons stated in Exhibit "A;" and that certain
significant effects have been or can be reduced to an acceptable level when
specific projects are proposed.
3. That said City Council hereby makes a statement of overriding considerations,
pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, in its decision to
adopt said comprehensive update of the Rohnert Park General Plan which
allows the potential occurrence of significant effects identified in the Final
EIR; this statement is presented in Exhibit "A."
4. That said City Council hereby approves and adopts. the Mitigation Program as
described in Exhibit "A."
5. That said City Council hereby finds that by making the changes to the draft
that are marked with an asterisk in Exhibit "13-1" that the final Housing
Element substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 of the
Government Code.
6. That said City Council hereby adopts the Revised Public Review Draft
General Plan, May 2000, and the Public Review Draft Housing Element, May
2000, together with the revisions as outlined in Exhibit "B" and "13-1"
(attached hereto and incorporated herein by the reference).
0)
RE_ LUTION NO. 2000 -152
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City staff is directed to make those
changes to the text, tables, or maps of the General Plan required by those
revisions to the draft General Plan adopted by the City Council on July 25, 2000.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Rohnert Park directs that the City Clerk keep on file a copy of said documents and
that the Planning Department maintain a copy of said document for public
inspection.
DULY AND REGULARLY PASSED BY THE ROHNERT PARK CITY
COUNCIL THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2000.
AYES: Flores, Mackenzie, Spiro and Vidak- Martinez
NOES: Reilly
ABSTAINED:None
ABSENT: None
... �
f, ;-, �; ;
R,
3
Mayor
/ . Vice -Mayor
R1= LUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT "A"
COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN
AND HOUSING ELEMENT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS DOCUMENT
1. EIR CERTIFICATION
A. On July 25, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park certified the Final
Environmental Impact Report (also referred to as the Program or Final EIR) on
the Rohnert Park General. Plan as being in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA Guidelines
and found that it provides the necessary environmental documentation for
governmental decisions pertaining to the proposed General Plan, Housing
Element, and Urban Growth Boundary. The Final EIR was prepared for the City
of Rohnert Park by Dyett & Bhatia and consists of two separately bound reports
bearing the following titles and dates:
I. Rohnert Park General Plan Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report,
May 2000.
2. Rohnert Park General Plan Response to Comments Final Environmental
Impact Report, July 2000.
PAP rinrrnmPnts and related files and information are on file in the Rohnert Park
Planning Department, City Hall, 6750 Commerce Blvd., Rohnert Park, California
94928.
B. The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park, pursuant to Section 15090 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, certifies that it has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final EIR described above prior to reaching a
decision on the comprehensive update of the Rohnert Park General Plan and
Housing Element.
II. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby approves and adopts the
comprehensive update of the Rohnert Park General Plan and Housing Element as a self -
monitoring document as described in Chapter 7 of the Revised Draft Environmental
Impact Report. All mitigation measures that can be implemented by the City of Rohnert
Park have been incorporated into the updated General Plan (the "Project "). The
monitoring of the document will occur during the review of discretionary actions, public
projects, capital improvement programs, and periodic updates, reviews, and amendments.
Implementation of the Plan, and hence its monitoring, is the responsibility of the City of
Rohnert Park and its Departments and Divisions.
1
RE, UUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
III. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that no approval shall be made of
a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant
effects of the project unless certain written findings are made for each of the significant
effects. These findings shall be accompanied by a statement of the facts supporting such
findings.
The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park in approving the comprehensive update of
the Rohnert Park General Plan and Housing Element, and in adopting the findings
outlined below, recognizes that the CEQA review at the General Plan stage is meant to
focus on the potential environmental consequences of the broad policy decisions reflected
in the plan, not to specify the mitigation measures for every project which will follow or
to rule out any environmental impact from future projects. No matter what broad policies
are adopted in the General Plan, it is foreseeable that some individual projects will be
proposed which involve some environmental impact which cannot be mitigated. That
does not mean that the City's selection of one broad general plan policy over another
necessarily has a significant environmental impact. CEQA does not require that the
General Plan prohibit all future development in the City which has any significant
impact.
Specific development projects which have a potential significant impact would be subject
to separate CEQA review, including consideration of project- specific mitigation
measures and the requirement of a statement of overriding considerations if impacts
cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. The comprehensive update of the
_ _i: _ J
S,, an .A r 7� - 41,n rarinrtinn of ;mnw,
Rohnert Park General Plan includes policies and JL0.11u0.LUO 1W. _
appropriate to a general plan. Further, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park
recognizes that the zoning ordinance, capital improvement program, specific plans, and
redevelopment plans are implementation tools that must be consistent with the General
Plan. Therefore, although they are not being approved at the same time as the General
Plan and Housing Element it is reasonable to anticipate their approval in the future in a
form consistent with the comprehensive update of the General Plan and Housing
Element.
Outlined below under each of the three required findings are statements the City Council
makes as their written findings in its decision to approve the comprehensive update of the
General Plan and Housing Element. The areas of potential significant impact identified
in the Final EIR for the General Plan and Housing Element updates are land use,
community character, transportation, air quality, noise, geology and seismicity, biological
resources, hydrology, flooding and water quality, agricultural resources, water resources,
wastewater, solid waste and hazardous materials, public safety and emergency
preparedness, schools, parks and community facilities, cultural resources, and telephone,
cable, and energy.. Some of these significant or potentially significant effects can be
significantly reduced by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures and /or policies.
4
RE -UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
Others cannot be avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures, and they are
outweighed by overriding considerations discussed in Section IV below.
This section presents in greater detail the City's findings with respect to the
environmental effects of the project. It also summarizes the evidence relied upon by the
City in making these findings. This evidence is drawn from the Final EIR, other
evidence presented to the City, including but not limited to the testimony and exhibits
presented to the Commission at the July 13, 2000 hearing on this matter, and all other
information in the administrative record.
Environmental Finding 1.
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the
Final EIR.
Statement. The Summary Table of Impacts and Mitigation Measures (Table 1.2 -1) is
attached as Exhibit A -1. The Table outlines the environmental impacts identified in the
Final EIR, the significance of the impact before mitigation, mitigation measures, and the
significance after mitigation. The significant or potentially significant impacts are listed
below by impact number and a short description (Beneficial impacts do not require any
findings and have not been listed below). A Finding relative to each impact is provided.
A. LAND USE
Impact 4.1a: Reduction in Open Space:
Finding: The project's potential impact on open space remains significant after
mitigation. The policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact will reduce, but
not avoid, this impact. No additional mitigation is available to further lessen this impact.
Accordingly, this impact remains significant and unavoidable (see Section IV, Statement
of Overriding Considerations, below).
Impact 4.1- b- Development within the Community Separator;
4.1- c- Incompatibility of Adjacent Uses;
4.1 -e- Jobs /Ilousing Imbalance;
4.1- f- Conflicts with Sonoma County General Plan; and
4.1- g- Displacement of Businesses by Redevelopment of the Southwest Shopping
Center.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for each impact,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
RE -UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
B. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Impact 4.2 -c -View Blockage from Points along the Western Edge of Rohnert Park;
4.2 -d- Alteration of the Visual Character of the Urban Edge; and
4.2 -e- Increase in Housing Density in New Developments Incongruous with Existing
Areas.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for each impact,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
C. TRANSPORTATION
Impact 4.3- a- Exceedance of Maximum Level of Service Standards on 14 Roadway
Segments.
Finding: In addition to the policie "s outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measures are included in the General Plan:
1. Add 2 lanes to Stony Point, north- of Milbrae.
2. Improve Millbrae and Wilfred Avenues to Stony Point Drive.
3. Policy addition: "Monitor the roadway system to identify roadway segments
that fall below established LOS standards and identify and implement the
necessary roadway improvements that result in improved traffic flow."
The project's potential impact at 11 locations remains significant after mitigation. The
above policies and mitigation measures will reduce, but not avoid, this impact. No
additional mitigation is available to further lessen this impact. Accordingly, this impact
_.a,.l -1„ /,,,.,, Q�..f;.,, -, 7V Qtatamant of nVP.TI'1l�1T1S7
remains significant and unavoidable "see vw�ion � . , Qtaf -rni: - "f n
Considerations, below).
Impact 4.3- b- Exceedance of Maximum Level of Service Standards for 10
Intersections.
Finding: In addition to the policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measures shall be included in the General Plan:
1. Modify Policy TR -11 to incorporate additional improvements listed in Table
4.3 -6.
2. Modify Policy TR -1 to allow LOS D for intersections near US 101.
The project's potential impact at 4 locations remains significant after mitigation. The
above policies and mitigation measures will reduce, but not avoid, this impact. No
additional mitigation is available to further lessen this impact. Accordingly, this impact
remains significant and unavoidable (see Section IV, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, below).
4
RE _UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
Impact 4.3 -c- Increased Need for Transit;
4.3 -d- Increased Demand for Additional Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation; and
4.3 -e- Increased Traffic Congestion at the Vicinity of the School Site;
Finding: In addition to the policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measures shall be included in the General Plan:
1. Adjust signal timing at the Synder Lane intersections with Rohnert Park
Expressway, Southwest Boulevard, East Cotati Avenue, and at Creekside
Middle School to accommodate traffic flow during school peak traffic periods
2. Identify traffic congestion problems that occur during pick -up and drop -off
periods for each school site in Rohnert Park, and implement appropriate
measures to improve traffic circulation.
As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for each impact and the
above listed mitigation measures, the project's impact in these areas will be less than
significant.
D. AIR QUALITY
Impact 4.4 -a: General Plan Inconsistent with the 1997 Clean Air Plan; and
4.4- b- Potential Increase in Carbon Monoxide, Ozone Precursors and Particulate
Matter.
Finding: The project's potential impact on air quality remains significant after mitigation.
The outline in the Summary Table will reduce, but not avoid, this impact. No additional
mitigation is available to further lessen this impact. Accordingly, this impact remains
r� c�l..�l....,.,,_ ,..0
significant and unavoidable. (see Section IV, OLdLUMQ11t Vx vJiiaaul,lg 1J11J1lLV1N.lviav,
below).
Impact 4.4 -c: Construction of New Development Could Generate Dust.
Finding: As mitigated by the policy outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
E. NOISE
Impact 4.5 -a: Increases in Traffic will result in Increased Noise Levels for Noise
Sensitive Receptors;
4.5 -b: New Roads will result in Noise Levels in Excess of 60 dB Ldn;
4.5 -c: Development of Noise Sensitive Uses within Areas Subject to 60 dB Ldn from
Roads and Railroads; and
4.5 -d: Potential Exposure of Noise Sensitive Uses to Construction- Related Noise.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
RI LUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
F. GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
Impact 4.6 -a: New Development may be subject to Ground Shaking and
Liquefaction; and
4.6 -b: New Development may be subject to Effects of Expansive Soils.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
G. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.7- a- Potential Elimination or Disruption of Special Status Species and
Habitats;
4.7- b- Potential Elimination or Degradation of Areas with Potential to Support
Wetlands andWildlife;
4.7 -c- Potential Introduction and Spread of Non - native Invasive Plan Species; and
4.7 -d- Potential Reduction or Degradation of Common Habitats and Common
Wildlife Species.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
«1 mTTI /NTT A T TT�T
H. HYDROLOGY, FLOODING, AND
w ry i In V UtiLi X JL
Impact 4.8- a- Potential Increase in Nonpoint- Source Pollutant Levels;
4.8- b- Potential Interference with Groundwater Recharge;
4.8 -c- Increases in Stormwater Runoff could Increase Flooding Potential;
4.8 -d -New Development could be subject to 100 -year Floods; and
4.8 -e -New Development could Induce Construction - Related Erosion and
Sedimentation.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
I. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.9 -a- Potential Land Use Incompatibilities with Adjacent Uses; and
4.- 9- b- Potential Removal of Existing Agricultural and Rural Residential Uses
Outside Existing Sphere of Influence.
0
RE .UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
J. WATER RESOURCES
Impact 4.10 -a- Increased Demand for Water Increasing Pumping from
Groundwater Aquifer.
Finding: In addition to the policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measures are included in the General Plan:
1. Commit to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) of water
conservation. Such measures include:
• Requiring meters for all new connections and billing by volume.
• Establishing a program for retrofitting existing un- metered connections
and billing by volume.
• Identifying intra- and inter - agency disincentives or barriers to retrofitting
mixed -use commercial accounts with dedicated landscape meters: and
• Conducting a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide
incentives to switch mixed -use accounts to dedicated landscape meters.
2. Implement applicable large landscape conservation programs and incentives,
as identified in the proposed MOU Regarding Water Transmission System
Capacity Allocation During Temporary Impairment (4/24/00).
3. Adopt a water conservation rate schedule that: increases as the quantity of
water used increases (i.e., a tiered rate schedule): and /or provides seasonal rate
or excess -use surcharges to reduce peak demands during summer months.
As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary "fable for each impact and i'ne
above listed mitigation measures, the project's impact in this area will be less than
significant.
K. WASTEWATER
Impact 4.11 -a- Increased Generation of Wastewater Flows Exceeding City's
Capacity Allocation.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
L. SOLID WASTE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 4.12 -a- Generation of Additional Amounts of Solid Waste; and
4.12 -b- Potential Increase in Exposure to Hazardous Waste.
RE. -UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
M. PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Impact 4.13 -a- Requirements for Police and Fire Protection that Exceed Availability;
4.13 -b -New Development Exposed to Risk of Wildland Fire Hazards; and
4.13 -c- Requirements for Emergency Preparedness that Exceeds Current
Capabilities.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
N. SCHOOLS
Impact 4.14 -a- Generation of Additional High School Student Enrollment Beyond
Current Capacity; and
4.14 -b- Generation of Additional Student Enrollment that May Impact other School
Districts.
Finding: In addition to the policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measure are included in the General Plan:
1. Work with the Bellevue Union School District (BUSD) and the Santa
Rosa High School District (SRHSD) to provide adequate school sites and
facilities.
As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for each impact and the
above listed mitigation measure, the project's impact in these areas will be less than
significant.
O. PARKS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Impact 4.15 -b- Reduced Visual and Physical Access to Surrounding Open Space.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
P. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 4.16 -a- Potential Impacts on Identified Historic or Cultural Resources; and
4.16 -b- Potential Impacts on Unidentified Cultural Resources.
8
RE _UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
Finding: In addition to the policies outlined in the Summary Table for this impact, the
following mitigation measures are included in the General Plan:
1. Require construction activities and development adjacent to sites of
historic or archaeological resources to avoid degradation by:
• Studying the potential effects of development and construction on
the resources; and
• Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified
impacts.
2. Require setbacks and buffers for development adjacent to sites with
historic and archaeological resources, as needed, in order to limit
impacts to the site.
3. Require pre - construction surveys and monitoring during any ground
disturbance for all development in areas of historical and
archaeological sensitivity.
As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for each impact and the
above listed mitigation measures, the project's impact in these areas will be less than
significant.
Q. TELEPHONE, CABLE AND ENERGY
Impact 4.17 -a- Potential Exceedance of Utility Service Capabilities.
Finding: As mitigated by the policies outlined in the Summary Table for these impacts,
the project's impact in these areas will be less than significant.
In summary as stated in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR (May 2000) and as indicated in the
Summary Table (Exhibit A -1), all but three potential adverse impacts (i.e., open space,
transportation and air quality impacts) would be subject to the policies, standards, and/or
mitigation measures that would minimize or eliminate the impacts associated with
development in accordance with the updated Rohnert Park General Plan. Many of the
General Plan's policies are specifically designed to avoid or minimize impacts, thereby
self - mitigating most of the potentially significant impacts.
The City is surrounded by open space, agricultural, and rural residential uses, and the
growth pressures are strong. The proposed Land Use and Growth Management Element
of the General Plan establishes an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), regulates the amount
and timing of annual residential development, requires concurrent construction and
availability of public facilities, and requirements that new development be contiguous
with existing areas of development. These provisions together with the policies
identified in the Community Design, Transportation, Open Space, Parks and Public
Facilities, Environmental Conservation, Health and Safety, and Noise Elements serve to
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the
Final EIR relative to land use, community character, noise, geology and seismicity,
biological resources, hydrology, flooding and water quality, agricultural resources, water
0
RE _UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
resources, wastewater, solid waste and hazardous materials, public safety and emergency
preparedness, schools, parks and community facilities, cultural resources, and telephone,
cable, and energy. The cumulative impacts on the loss of open space, transportation, and
air quality cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance (see Section IV, Statement of
Overriding Considerations, below).
Environmental Finding 2.
Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
Statement. The Final EIR prepared for the updated Rohnert Park General Plan is a
Program EIR. The only mitigation measures in the Program EIR that are within the
jurisdiction of another agency are measures that require roadway improvements outside
the City's jurisdiction (e.g., Add two lanes to Stony Point, north of Milbrae and Improve
Millbrae and Wilfred Avenues to Stony Point Drive). Policy TR -2 . states "Require
mitigation measures, as needed for new development that increases traffic such that LOS
levels fall below the established minimum standard. Ensure that mitigation measures are
coordinated with roadway improvements programmed for funding through
transportation- related impact fees." The explanatory statement for this policy makes it
clear that the developer will be responsible for project related improvements both within
and outside the city limits. Hence, the responsibility for the improvements will be that of
the developer and the measures will require the developer to work with other
jurisdictions /agencies to implement improvements; however, the measures do not
specifically require another agency to adopt the measures.
In addition, the policies of the General Plan identify a number of areas where other
jurisdictions will have some responsibility or jurisdiction. It includes policies that are to
be implemented as development occurs under the guidelines and regulatory mechanisms
of the General Plan. Examples of policies that involve other agencies include GM -17
thru GM -23, TR -14 thru TR -2113, TR -26 thru TR -30, TR -32 thru TR -33, TR -35 and TR-
36, OS -1, PF -1 thru PF -6, PF -7 and PF -8, PF -12 and PF -18, EC -4, EC -15, EC -22, HS-
3A, HS -11, HS -18, NS -5, and NS -8.
Of particular importance are Policies TR -21A and 21B which establish a framework for
addressing the regional traffic congestion problems surrounding the City of Rohnert Park.
With or without adoption of the Draft General Plan, long -term solutions to traffic
congestion on Petaluma Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue (within the City of Cotati)
require a cooperative , regional approach for Petaluma Hill Road by Sonoma County, the
Penngrove area, Sonoma State University, and the cities of Cotati, Petaluma, Santa Rosa,
and Rohnert Park, and for East Cotati Avenue by Sonoma State University and the cities
of Cotati and Rohnert Park. Policies TR21A and 21B commit the City of Rohnert Park to
being a responsible participant in formulating measures to minimize traffic congestion on
Petaluma Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue (within the City of Cotati), and to payment
or other contribution to its fair share of the ultimate solution.
10
RE -UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
In development of the General Plan, the City of Rohnert Park initiated a working group
of the affected jurisdictions to identify potential improvements to mitigate the regional
traffic impacts. The City of Rohnert Park encourages the cities of Cotati, Petaluma, and
Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, and SSU to adopt policies demonstrating their commitment
to participating in long -term solutions to these problems. Such cooperation, and adoption
of these policies, can and should be adopted by each of these affected jurisdictions.
As noted, many of the policies within the General Plan encourage cooperation with other
agencies to resolve cumulative impacts in the areas of transportation, open space,
schools, water, wastewater, wildlife habitat, drainage, solid waste, hazardous materials,
and noise. Until development occurs, however, it is not known when or precisely in what
manner other public agencies will have responsibility or jurisdiction relative to changes
or alterations.
Environmental Finding 3.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
Statement. MITIGATION MEASURES. Only one of the mitigation measures
identified in the Draft EIR is considered to be infeasible and that is the proposed
mitigation measure in Table 4.3 -6 which recommends adding an additional left turn lane
to the intersection of East Cotati Avenue and Snyder Lane. This mitigation measure is
_, _ -ti tit.,_ ,...F... -., �i,4; ,,,-. NTH -- of +IiP rNtll Pr mitigation
infeasible due to existing aevewpinuilts al Ule 1ntCrSCC4' 011. .
measures identified in the Final EIR are considered to be infeasible.
ALTERNATIVES.
Alternatives Considered: 1997 -1998. These eight alternatives, described on pages 6 -1
through 6 -4 of the Revised Draft EIR, were considered in light of information that
emerged from the General Plan Summit of October 1997 and community concerns
expressed at that time. The City concluded that these alternatives did not meet the
community's needs for protection of the community separator north of the City and did
not address key issues of community character, consumption of open space and prime
farmland, housing needs, and economic development.
No Project Alternative. The No Project Alternative represents the case where the
proposed General Plan is not adopted or implemented. In absence of the proposed
"project," the 1995 General Plan would continue to guide the City's development and
sites within the City limits would be developed in accordance with that 1995 Plan. The
No Project Alternative is identified in the Final EIR as the environmentally superior
alternative, because it would avoid most of the adverse impacts created by the proposed
proj ect.
11
RI LUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
The No Project Alternative would make it infeasible for the City to meet its regional
housing need goals for very -low, low, and moderate income housing as established by the
Association of Bay Area Governments and adopted by the State Department of Housing
and Community Development. As of June 1, 2000, the preliminary allocation for
Rohnert Park's Regional Housing Needs, 1999 -2006, as established by ABAG is 401
units for very -low, 270 units for low, 597 units for moderate, and 856 for above -
moderate, for a total of 2,124 unit. Under the No Project Alternative no new sites for
housing development would be provided. Furthermore, by eliminating opportunities for
the construction of additional housing, housing costs within the City would likely
increase further limiting the availability of affordable housing.
The No Project Alternative also would not provide a mechanism for the establishment of
permanent open space as provided for by the proposed General Plan Policies OS -4, OS-
4A, OS -413, OS -4C, and OS -41). Nor , would the No Project Alternative provide a
mechanism or program for addressing the existing regional traffic problems along
Petaluma Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue. (See discussions of open space and traffic in
the Section IV, Statement of Overriding Considerations, below.)
Existing General Plan and Canon Manor Alternative. This alternative is identical to the
No Project Alternative, plus full buildout of Canon Manor. It is considered the next
environmentally superior alternative since it would avoid most of the adverse impacts
created by the proposed project except those that would occur in and around Canon
Manor. Canon Manor, however, is already partially developed so the project increase in
housing units at 2.0 unit per acre would be only 514 units. This alternative would also
make it infeasible for the City to meet its regional housing need goals.
i _ _ 1 �. F �1,� o�4nM;A,rn nt of inPrmnnpnt
This alternative also would not provide a iiieChanisrn ivi ui0. esLU -W = .,=__..__, �= t
open space as provided for by the proposed General Plan Policies OS -4, OS -4A, OS -413,
OS -4C, and OS -4D. Nor, would it provide a mechanism or program for addressing the
existing regional traffic problems along Petaluma Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue. (See
discussions of open space and traffic in the Section IV, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, below.)
Reduced Growth Alternative. This alternative resembles the proposed General Plan but
calls for less overall development on the east and west sides, as well as reduced
population growth (47,400 for the Reduced Growth Alternative vs. 50,400 for the
Proposed Project) and job growth (30,500 vs. 31,600). As would be expected, the
Reduced Growth Alternative would have fewer impacts than the proposed project. It
would, however, still not come close to providing enough developable land for the City to
meet its regional housing need goals.Also, the job/housing ratio would be greater than the
Proposed Project (1:21 vs. 1:24) further exacerbating the need for housing.
In summary, there are not sufficient vacant sites identified in the alternatives to meet the
projected need for very -low, low, and moderate income housing. Further, due to these
housing shortages, housing costs would likely increase within the City making housing
12
R-L LUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
even less affordable than it is today. In addition, the No Project and the Existing General
Plan Plus Canon Manor Alternatives would limit the potential growth of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers; and, the projected job/housing ratio for each of
the three alternatives would be higher than the proposed Plan. Hence, all three of the
alternatives, the No Project, the Existing General Plan Plus Canon Manor, and the
Reduced Growth Alternative, are considered by the City Council as infeasible. Refer to
Section IV, Statement of Overriding Considerations.
IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that where the decision of the
public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the
Final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall state in writing the
specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in
the record. The Final EIR identifies three areas of significant unavoidable environmental
impacts that would occur with the proposed Plan: open space, transportation, and air
quality.
Buildout of the General Plan would result in: (1) the conversion of approximately 1,055
acres of open space to developed area, (2) worsening levels of service for several
roadway segments (Commerce Blvd, from the US 101 onramps to State Farm Drive,
Petulama Hill Road, Old Redwood Highway, and East Cotati Avenue) and intersections
within the City and Planning Area (Old Redwood Highway /Adobe Road and Adobe
Road /Petaluma Hill Road), and (3) additional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) contributing
to the relative degradation of the air quality in the immediate Rohnert Park area. The
proposed Plan would also result in significant irreversible environmental %111<11.1 in
addition to reductions in open space and degradation of air quality; these changes include
commitment of additional water resources and energy sources to serve new residents.
The proposed Plan could also result in significant irreversible changes during the course
of constructing development allowed by the Plan including the consumption of building
materials and energy.
In relation to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council of the City
of Rohnert Park hereby makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in
its decision to adopt the comprehensive update of the General Plan and Housing Element
which allows the occurrence of potentially significant impacts.
In making their decision, the City Council finds it necessary to balance both
environmental and economic considerations; more specifically they found:
(1) The proposed General Plan policies reduce the impact on open space by: (1)
requiring the permanent preservation of about 180 acres of open space land
outside the City in exchange for the conversion of community separator lands to
urban uses (i.e., the proposed General Plan's policies establish a requirement that
permanent open space be provided in exchange for the development of lands
13
RE. i.UTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
within the community separator; it also identifies those lands, by priority that are
geographically suited for community separator mitigation (see policies OS -4, OS-
4A, OS -413, OS -4C and OS -4D); (2) establishment of an open space buffer along
portions of Petaluma Hill Road and Railroad Avenue; (3) establishment of
additional park space along the City's eastern edge; and (4) open space buffers
along the City's creeks.
(2) The proposed General Plan establishes level of service standards for roadways
within the City's limit and the framework for the cooperation of jurisdictions
which are currently impacted by the overall cumulative regional traffic impacts.
With or without adoption of the Draft General Plan, long -term solutions to traffic
congestion on Petaluma Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue (within the City of
Cotati) require a cooperative, regional approach for Petaluma Hill Road by
Sonoma County, the Penngrove area, Sonoma State University, and the cities of
Cotati, Petaluma, Santa Rosa, and Rohnert Park, and for East Cotati Avenue by
Sonoma State University and the cities of Cotati and Rohnert Park. Policies
TR21 A and 21B commit the City of Rohnert Park to being a responsible
participant in formulating measures to minimize traffic congestion on Petaluma
Hill Road and East Cotati Avenue (within the City of Cotati), and to payment or
other contribution to its fair share of the ultimate solution. In development of the
General Plan, the City of Rohnert Park initiated a working group of the affected
jurisdictions to identify potential improvements to mitigate the regional traffic
impacts. The City of Rohnert Park encourages the cities of Cotati, Petaluma, and
Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, and SSU to adopt policies demonstrating their
commitment to participating in long -term solutions to these problems.
(3) Expansion of the current city "limit and sphere -of- influence -uurldai,ca lb
necessary in order to provide for growth of the current population, housing for the
projected job growth, and affordable housing for all income levels. The
jobs/housing balance under the proposed Plan would be 1.21 at buildout
compared to 1.23 for the Existing General Plan Plus Canon Manor to 1.27 for the
No Project alternative. To not adopt the proposed Plan would be to allow for a
greater imbalance in the jobs/housing ratio resulting in further redistribution of
the regional housing needs and indirectly impacting surrounding jurisdictions and
counties (which would have to provide additional housing to meet the need)
and/or overcrowding within the existing housing market.
The City is also obligated by the State to provide for its share of the Regional
Housing Need. The need could not be met at all under either the No Project or
Existing General Plan Plus Canon Manor. The proposed Plan goes the furthest
toward addressing the housing needs and the jobs/housing balance than any of the
three alternatives.
The pressure to allow more development is clearly evident based on the escalating
cost of housing over the last quarter and the increasing interest in Sonoma County
from high -tech businesses (e.g., Nokia proposal to locate in Cotati and the
14
RL LUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT A
proposed expansion of Next Level within the City of Rohnert Park). Further, with
the sunset of the previous UGB boundary on July 1, 2000, it is likely that there
will be development applications to expand the City's current city limit line by
annexations and efforts to change the City's existing sphere -of- influence.
Adoption of the proposed Plan will provide for orderly, planned development that
can be managed over the twenty year period of the Plan to minimize overall
impacts.
(4) The Land Use and Growth Management Element establishes goals and policies to
guide the phasing and pace of development including a method to help ensure a
predictable growth rate, provisions for ensuring adequate public facilities (i.e.,
streets, water, wastewater, solid waste, and parks), and programs to ensure a
balance of land uses within future specific plan areas.
(5) The Housing, Community Design, Environmental Conservation, Health and
Safety, and Noise Elements provide an updated set of policies directed toward the
preservation of the environment and the quality of life in the City of Rohnert
Park, and addressing the issues faced today by the City and anticipated in the
future. For example, these elements address the current and projected concerns
relating to water, solid waste disposal, wastewater, noise, emergency
management, and the handling of hazardous waste.
All of the adopted goals, policies, standards and implementation programs of the
proposed General Plan and Housing Element reflect years of accumulated public input
and community consensus building compiled into a comprehensively updated General
Plan that is user friendly, addresses current issues, is consistent with State Planning Law,
a _ a "%A
and responds to the projected changes in the community and the region in Me iiext /-v
years.
The City Council finds that the comprehensive update of the Rohnert Park General Plan
and Housing Element attempts to guide and manage growth in a way that is more
beneficial than the existing 1995 General Plan or the alternatives. The City Council
further finds that these benefits outweigh the potential significant impacts, even if the
impacts may be greater in some areas.
15
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT "B"
COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN
AND HOUSING ELEMENT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
Summary of General Plan Changes
Changes to the Revised Public Review Draft General Plan, dated May 2000 are indicated in
underline /°*rte
Page 1 -4
Several objectives for the General Plan were identified and considered by the Oversight
Committee, based on public outreach conducted early in the General Plan process. The
objectives form +he ha provide a foundation of for development of the goals and policies in
the General Plan, ...
Page 1 -6; sixth bullet
• Maintain or increase open space ratios within the City;
rage i i i. A a tL,;,rl i,.,llate
I age 1-1 1, seconu anu Third buaavw
• Specific Plans. The City ...To provide additional direction for lcey- areas -ef new
development, policies in the Land Use and Growth Management element call for
preparation of specific plans for all new development areas and identify the boundaries of
the new specific plan areas. the. Univer-sity District and the N P-4-4-h-A.vest Area.
• Neighborhood and Special Area Plans. A concept plan for the City Center was prepared
in early 1999. The City may consider establishing neighborhood and special area plans
for additional areas, Canen ?` ane , with unique planning needs.
Page 1 -13, under "Periodic Review," add new first paragraph as follows:
The City will prepare an Implementation Plan within six months _ of the General Plan's
adoption That Implementation Plan shall contain language that allows for technical changes
to be made in the General Plan Furthermore implementing ordinances required by the
policies of this General Plan shall be adopted as soon as appropriate.
Page 1 -13; last paragraph
The first revision of the Plan will u..-....�.... -- in the year- 2-0-0-5 start five ,years after adoption
of the Plan. As part of the ...
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 1 -16; add new Section 1.8 General Plan Applicability, as follows:
1.8 General Plan Applicability
This General Plan applies to all applications for development within the existing and /or
proposed City limits submitted on and after July 25, 2000 unless otherwise specified In the
provisions of this Plan.
Page 2 -4
Table 2.1 -2:
Rohnert Park Housing Inside City Limits, 1999
Source: California Department of Finance, Official State Estimates, January
1999
Page 2 -5
• Near Rohnert Park Expressway (10 Acres). North of the Expressway and east of Snyder Lane.
T_ h ewe exi sits a deed re stFiction that this land be -use, d for medical use.
Page 2 -6
Intensity of Development
Rohnert Park is more densely developed than any other suburban jurisdiction in Sonoma
County. Average citywide housing density for land occupied by residential uses, excluding
Canon Manor, is approximately 8.0 housing units per gross acre. This is the highest residential
density of all cities in Sonoma County. Density varies by neighborhood; analysis based on 10,
acre samples of four Reighber-heeds and Canon Maner suggests that neighine-rheeds built prie
te 1.980 generafly have, Chapter 3: Community Design presents more
detail on neighborhood form and character.
Number of Units
As % of
total
Single- family Detached
7,221
47 %
Single- family Attached
1,719
11%
Multifamily Residences
2 -4 units
11048
5 units or more
3,972
Multifamily sub -total
5,020
33%
While Homes
1,466
9%
Total
15,426
100%
Source: California Department of Finance, Official State Estimates, January
1999
Page 2 -5
• Near Rohnert Park Expressway (10 Acres). North of the Expressway and east of Snyder Lane.
T_ h ewe exi sits a deed re stFiction that this land be -use, d for medical use.
Page 2 -6
Intensity of Development
Rohnert Park is more densely developed than any other suburban jurisdiction in Sonoma
County. Average citywide housing density for land occupied by residential uses, excluding
Canon Manor, is approximately 8.0 housing units per gross acre. This is the highest residential
density of all cities in Sonoma County. Density varies by neighborhood; analysis based on 10,
acre samples of four Reighber-heeds and Canon Maner suggests that neighine-rheeds built prie
te 1.980 generafly have, Chapter 3: Community Design presents more
detail on neighborhood form and character.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 2 -7; third -last paragraph
Several sites or easements in the Rohnert Park area have already been purchased for
preservation purposes; these sites are shown on Figure 5.1 -1.
Page 2 -12; first paragraph
In addition, mixed -use or multi -use development is encouraged at two three other sites: the
northwest growth area, southwest of Adrian Drive /Southwest Boulevard, and a center in the
southeast.
Page 2 -12; insert after the bulleted list:
Future Boundaries
The General Plan Diagram shows the proposed future Sphere of Influence for the City; future
City limits are proposed to coincide with this Sphere of Influence. Decisions on changes to the
City limits and the Sphere of Influence require approval of the Sonoma County Local Agency
Formation Commission ( LAFCO) Also shown on the Diagram is the Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB) which outlines the limits of urban growth under this General Plan. This
UGB is entirely within the proposed sphere and will become operative upon adoption of this
General Plan; UGBs are neither recognized by_LAFCO nor do they require LAFCO approval.
Page 2 -12; Third -last paragraph
FAR limitations are included for residential land use classifications in order to relate 10us -Ing
size to lot size; both density and FAR standards shall apply to residential developments; the
application of residential density and intensity standards is illustrated in Figure 2.2 -2.
Building area devoted to structured or covered parking (if any) is not included in FAR
calculations for non - residential developments. However, parking garages /structures are
(emphasis in original) included in FAR calculations for residential uses. The City intends to
incorporate these FARs as part of the Zoning Ordinance and when so incorporated, amend
the General Plan to delete residential FARS from the General Plan.
Page 2 -12; Last paragraph
Existing legal housing units within the City limits as of November 1, 1999 of a- sn ^ °i=;
tL IM-1-axim-lum Specified in Table, 2.2-2 are grandfathered and are deemed to be fully
conforming to the intensity (FAR) provisions of the General Plan.
91
Publicly accessible
portion of the buffer.
Development rights
accrue from up to 10
foot depth of this portion
Effective area for
calculating FAR
(net parcel area)
Publicly accessible
pathway
Required setback
from creek
(minimum 50 feet)
Effective area for calculating project
density (gross site area minus non - publicly
accessible greenways)
Figure 2.2 -2
Residential Density and
FAR Calculation (illustrative)
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 2 -15; New second -last paragraph
In addition, policies for specific areas or sites in the General Plan may restrict development
intensities to less than what may otherwise be permitted under a specific land use
classification.
Gross density standards ...
Page 2 -16; Table 2.2 -1
Renumber existing footnote #4 to #5 and add new footnote #4 to the Industrial 0.5 Maximum
Permitted FAR:
4 Discretionary increases may be permitted up to a total FAR of 1.0 subject to review_
and approval for development meeting specific standards included In the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 2 -17
Residential
Add to end of second paragraph:
Second units permitted by local regulation and State - mandated density bonuses for provision
of affordable housing are in addition to densities otherwise permitted in each of the residential
land use classifications.
Rural Estate Residential
Single- family detached residential development at densities of 2.0 housing units per gross acre
or less. This classification is intended for two areas: Canon Manor, and at designated locations
at the city's ultimate physical edge on the eastside to provide transition between urban and
open space uses. The Zoning Ordinance may split this classification into two categories: Rural
Residential to be applied to the Canon Manor, and Estate Residential which would be
applied to the other areas with this designation.
Page 2 -18
Medium Density
Housing at densities from 6.1 to 12.0 units per gross acre. Dwelling types may include
attached or detached single - family housing. The Zoning Ordinance may reserve some areas
designated as Medium Density for detached (zero -lot -line or other) single - family residential
development. Multifamily housing type is not permitted. Side -by -side duplexes not separated
by a property line or without individual heating systems are also permitted, provided they are
similar in appearance to single- family structures.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
High Density
Residential development at densities ranging from 12.1 to 24.0 units per gross acre. With he
AN 'Ailable density bonus 25 Percent for- pr-ojeets f4piling State eriteria for- bonus fo
-Aff-A-r-d-able hE)USifig (90V0FRM@Rt GAd - 9 S; 65915) th@ upper- density limit axould be 30.0 units pe
gross a This designation would permit a wide range of housing types, ...
Page 2 -18
Commercial
This designation is intended to provide sites for retail areas containing a wide variety of
businesses, including: retail stores, eating and drinking establishments, commercial
recreation, service stations, automobile sales and repair services, financial, business and
personal services, hotels and motels, and educational and social services. In order to provide
for the housing anticipated in the Housing Element and provide for internal consistency
between the Land Use Element and the Housing Element residential uses may be
conditionally permitted on two sites subject to the provisions of the Housing Element: E.
Cotati Avenue /Bodway Parkway site and the Mountain Shadows proposed site on Golf
Course Drive. Maximum permitted FAR is 1.5 for hotels and 0.4 for all other uses....
N (Neighborhood). Stores, personal service establishments, offices, financial
and ractmirantc and rafPC that serve the everyday needs of the immediate
U UJ11lliJJlJ, .- -- - - - -- - - - -� -- - -� - -- - - -
neighborhood. Department or ...
R (Regional). Shopping centers that typically include department stores or big -box
stores, which attract consumers from outside the city. Neighborhood- oriented
commercial uses are not -peFm '**P.. maybe limited within this district.
Page 2 -19
Public /Institutional
To provide for schools, government offices, transit sites, and other facilities that have a unique
public character, as well as Sonoma State University. Religious facilities are not called out
separately on the General Plan Diagram, although they would be permitted in but are inclu
in the this designation as well as other residential and commercial districts ^f 0ja & �=ty;
these facilities may or may not be specifically delineated on the Zoning Map.
Parks /Recreation
This designation provides for parks for active and passive recreation, recreation complexes,
community fields, public golf courses, stadiums, arboretums, and greenways. Ancillary
facilities such as concession stands, clubhouses, and equipment rental are also allowed.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 2 -19 and 2 -20
Open Space for Environmental Conservation
This designation includes sites with environmental and /or safety constraints. Included are
riparian corridors, sensitive habitats, and wetlands. For sites entirely within this designation,
development is limited to one housing unit per existing legal parcel, provided policies in
Chapter 6: Environmental Conservation, as well as protection standards that may be specified
in the Zoning Ordinance or elsewhere, are adhered to. For parcels partially within this
designation, no development is permitted within the Open Space designated area if other land
within the parcel does not have environmental and /or safety constraints. Land area with this
designation shall not be used in calculating allowable development. However, for parcels that
include creekside buffers, development rights that would result if adjacent land uses were to
be extended into a buffer can be transferred for land in the buffer that is directly accessible to
the public subject to a maximum 10 -foot depth on an acre - for -acre basis to the developable
parts of the parcel.
Page 2 -21; first sentence and Table 2.3-1
Table 2.3 -1 shows ... Approximately 1260 net acres would be developed within the UG13,
including infill sites. An additional 50 acres would be developed for community fields
outside the UGB.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Table 2.3 -1:
General Plan Buildout: Net Acreage of New Development
Inside 1999 Eastside Canon Westside Total
City Limits Manor &
Southeast
Residential
Estate 6040 210 0 270250
Low Density 0 140 70 0 210
Medium Density 0 60 20 0 80
High Density 0 40 0 45 85
Mixed Use 20 30 10 0 60
Commercial 40 0 0 60' 100
Industrial 120 0 100 55 275
Office 10 0 0 20 30
Public /Institutional 0 10 0 0 10
Parks /Open Space 2 155458 30 3 1904-95
Total 192 495478 440 183 13104;2 -85
1. Includes 24 acres in the Wilfred /Dowdell specific plan area.
2. Includes neighborhood parks, linear parks, community fields, and creek corridors. The community
fields (approximately 50 acres), are located inside the Sphere of Influence, but outside the Urban Growth
Boundary.
Note: This table is for informational purposes only, and does not represent adopted City policy related to
1 , ;Wf Tnta; nrrilrfnrit of the General Plan is neither anticipated by nor specified in the General Plan.
Source: Dyett & Bhatia
Page 2 -25
LU -I Provide a range of housing types in type and price, including large -lot homes and
housing oriented to students. Provide a variety of housing in all neighborhoods and
reserve sites, where appropriate, for housing types that would ensure that Rohnert
Park remains an inclusive, affer-dable community.
Page 2 -27; Policy LU -5, last sentence of italicized text
Further incentives +49 would result from reduced parking requirements...
Page 2 -28
LU -10 As part of the Zoning Ordinance, establish the following density bonuses for
residential projects:
— Up to 25 percent bonus for projects meeting State - criteria for ^ low- and
very -low income housing
L•1
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
According to the California Government Code Section 65915 this density bonus
shall be applicable to projects with five or more units when a developer of
housing agrees or proposes to construct at least (1)_20 percent of the total units of
a housing development for lower income households as defined in Section
50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code or (2) 10 percent of the total units of a
housing development for very low income households as defined in Section 50105
of the Health and Safety Code, or (3) 50 percent of the total dwelling units of a
housing development for qualifying residents as defined in Section 51.3 of the
Civil Code Other provision of the Government Code such as those relating to
continued affordability shall also apply.
10 percent bonus, upon Planning Commission discretionary approval only, ...
Pages 2 -28 and 2 -29
LU -10A Coordinate the adoption of each specific plan in a manner that provides for the
systematic implementation of this General Plan and is consistent with the growth
management and public facilities goals and policies of this General Plan. In order to
carry out this policy, the City Council may elect to adopt one specific plan at a time,
determine priorities for the adoption of each specific plan Initiate the preparation of a
specific plan or otherwise take action to ensure that the adoption of specific plans
adhere to the growth management and public facilities goals and policies of this
General Plan.
Require that all specific plans prepared pursuant to this General Plan include the
following components:
• A land use program as specified for each Specific Plan area in the General Plan,
including the maximum and minimum development for each land use type.
• A detailed traffic study, prepared by a City- approved traffic /transportation
planner, and reasonable mitigation measures to mitigate traffic impacts resulting
from the development;
• The proposed location and capacity of major infrastructure components, including
wells, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste, disposal, energy, and other essential
facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the Specific Plan;
Policy GM -9 also requires preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan.
• A site - specific biological assessment of wetlands, habitat areas, and creeksdides
by a City- approved biologist and a program for conservation /mitigation to the
extent feasible;
• Survey for California tiger salamander, both in breeding habitat and adjacent
upland estivation habitat, with appropriate mitigation, including avoidance and
minimization measures;
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
• Program for conservation of the natural resources along creeks and standards for
the conservation; development, and utilization of natural resources where
applicable; and
• Park and open space in accordance with the General Plan designation, including
access and connections to the bicycle system shown in Figure 4 -3.
• Hydrology and drainage for the area, with a goal to minimize runoff, and drainage
practices to be incorporated as part of individual projects to meet the the specific
plan objectives; and
• Plan to prevent stormwater pollution, including measures to be incorporated as
part of development on individual sites.
• Demonstration of adequate water supply.
This demonstration of adequacy should be consistent with policies PF -I1 through
PF -14 relating to water supply.
LU 1013 Include within each specific plan standards and criteria by which development will
be phased and standards for the conservation development, and utilization of
natural resources.
Page 2 -29
T J 1 -1 pC Permit hospitals, schools, police and fire stations darks and other facilities that
serve a vital public interest, subject to findings and necessary environmental
review, to be located in a specific plan area, even if a specific plan for the area has
not been adopted.
LU 10D As part of development of specific plans through site planning and other
techniques, ensure adequate transitions between incompatible uses, while
promoting the General Plan intent of integrated development of compatible uses.
(New policy under the Canon Manor section):
LU 13B As part of preparation of the Canon Manor Specific Plan develop standards for
public facilities that are appropriate for the area.
Page 2 -29; University District Specific Plan Area, policy LU -15, first bullet change and add new
bullet at end of bulleted list
• A 25 40 20 -40 acre mixed -use center, located directly adjacent to Sonoma State
University.
• Along the western specific . plan area boundary, between Hinebaugh and Copeland
Creeks a buffer setback of 100 feet shall be maintained and new residential
development adjacent to and east of the buffer shall be single story.
10
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 2 -30; Table 2.4 -1
Change Mixed Use acreage from 25 -40 to 20 -40 acres.
Adjust acreage calculations and housing units per change in district boundary to Keiser
Avenue.
Add footnote describing how housing unit calculations were derived.
Page 2 -31; Figure 2.4 -1, Specific Plan Areas
Modify the northern boundary of the University Specific Plan area to coincide with the north
side of Keiser Avenue for entire length between Snyder and Petaluma Hill Road.
Page 2 -32; information on parkland added to the table below
Table 2.4 -2:
Land Use Program: Northwest Specific Plan Area
Gross Housing Units
Non - residential Building
Acreage Minimum - Maximum
Area (1,000 s. f.)
Minimum - Maximum
High Density Residential
40 -50 800 -900
-
Commercial
40 -50 -
450 -480
Office
15 -25 -
230 -260
Industrial
55 -65 -
520 -560
Parks
2_4
Total
170 800 -900
1,200 -1,300
LU -21 As part of land use planning for the area, ensure that:
• Dowdell Avenue is not fronted by residential uses;
development is 1,,cated at4The western fringe of the site fronted by
residential uses, with maximum views of the surrounding open space from
individual units Residential uses can also be located in the interior of the area,
adjacent or in mix with the designated Commercial uses;
• Commercial and industrial developments provide adequate transition to residential
areas, and industrial developments incorporate a landscaped visual buffer at the
residential edges; and
• A minimum of 2 to 4 acres of parkland is provided, either in the Specific Plan
area, or immediately adjacent open space areas to the west.
11
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 2 -33; New table and reference to it
LU -22 Require preparation of a Specific Plan prior to approval of any development in the southeast
area.
The Specific Plan shall include a neighborhood park approximately five to eight acres in size,
as specified in OS -12 Development shall be in accordance with the development program
outlined in Table 2.4 -3.
Table 2.4 -3:
Land Use Program: Southeast Specific Plan Area
Gross Housing Units Non - residential
Acreage Minimum- Maximum Building Area (1,000
Minimum- Maximum
Rural / Estate Residential
22 -28
30 -50
Low Density Residential
28 -32
145 -165
Medium Density Residential
18 -22
180 -220
Mixed -Use Development
10 -14
55 -75
180 -220
Governed by
underlying FAR for
Industrial Uses
Industrial
92 -104
(Table 2.2 -11
Open Space
95 -105
Parks
5_8
Total
274
400 -490
150
Total
175
850 -950
Page 2 -33; Renumber Table 2.4 -3 to 2.4 -4 and revise (information on parkland added to the table;
changes resulting from the addition of the "notch" and finessing of the boundary lines of the specific
plan areas) [NOTE: THIS TABLE WILL BE FURTHER REVISED TO REFLECT NEW KEISER
AVE. DISTRICT BOUNDARY]
LU -28 Require that development in the Northeast Specific Plan area be in accordance with the
development program outlined in Table 2.4 3 2.4 -4.
M
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Table 2.z 4-3 2.4-4:
Land Use Program: Northeast Specific Plan Area
LU -29 Ensure that the Northeast Specific Plan incorporate the following features:
• An approximately 8 -acre park located southeast of Snyder Lane/Eleanor Road
directly adjacent to either Snyder Lane or the Five Creek greenway;
• Greenway along Five Creek;
• One -way couplet along the greenway, with on- street parking on both sides of each
one -way street;
• Medium and High Density Residential grouped along the Five Creek greenway or
the 8 -acre park, with access from the couplet. Medium and High Density
Residential development shall be at least 200 feet away from the edge of the
Snyder Lane right -of -way; and
• 100 -foot wide buffer or parkway on the south side of G Section; and
• Linear park along the eastside of Snyder Lane.
See policy CD -7 that explains this park in detail.
Page 2 -34; add new policy LU -33 under the Wilfred - Dowdell heading
LU -33 In preparing and adopting the Wilfred - Dowdell Specific Plan incorporate provisions
which ensure integration of land uses and design concepts with the adjacent Northwest
Specific Plan area.
Page 2 -37
GM -3 Establish a "trigger cam" on annual residential development approvals with the
following characteristics, in order to maintain an average development pace of 225
housing units per year for any three -year period:
13
Gross
Acreage
Housing Units
Minimum - Maximum
Rural / Estate Residential
2-2 -25
35 -40
39-58
50 -75
Low Density Residential
1 00-120
95 -115
538-688
500 -570
Medium Density Residential
6 -8
60 -80
High Density Residential
11 -14
200 -250
Parks
12
5-50
Total
175
850 -950
LU -29 Ensure that the Northeast Specific Plan incorporate the following features:
• An approximately 8 -acre park located southeast of Snyder Lane/Eleanor Road
directly adjacent to either Snyder Lane or the Five Creek greenway;
• Greenway along Five Creek;
• One -way couplet along the greenway, with on- street parking on both sides of each
one -way street;
• Medium and High Density Residential grouped along the Five Creek greenway or
the 8 -acre park, with access from the couplet. Medium and High Density
Residential development shall be at least 200 feet away from the edge of the
Snyder Lane right -of -way; and
• 100 -foot wide buffer or parkway on the south side of G Section; and
• Linear park along the eastside of Snyder Lane.
See policy CD -7 that explains this park in detail.
Page 2 -34; add new policy LU -33 under the Wilfred - Dowdell heading
LU -33 In preparing and adopting the Wilfred - Dowdell Specific Plan incorporate provisions
which ensure integration of land uses and design concepts with the adjacent Northwest
Specific Plan area.
Page 2 -37
GM -3 Establish a "trigger cam" on annual residential development approvals with the
following characteristics, in order to maintain an average development pace of 225
housing units per year for any three -year period:
13
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
If the combined number of residential development approvals in any two
successive calendar years exceeds 560 housing units, and if the development pace
for the preceding three -year period has exceeded an average of 225 housing units
per year, then a cap on development on the following calendar year will be
established ( "trigger cap "), to tai average development i of 225
housing units per- yea-r- fbr the th I . A;
Based on an average approximate population growth rate of 1%, General Plan
buildout would permit an addition of approximately 4,450 housing units over a
20 year period, or an average of approximately 225 housing units per year. The
figure 560 represents 125 percent of the two-year average growth of 450 (225 x 2)
housing units.
• The "trigger cap" may be adjusted up or down a maximum of ten (10) percent by
the City Council on an annual basis (see GM -4) to accommodate changes in land
use program assumptions (for example, vacancy rate factors and household size).
• The "trigger cap" will remain in effect as long as needed to ensure that housing
approvals in any consecutive three -year period does not exceed a total of 675 (or
an average of 225 per year); and
• Housing that is affordable to low- and very -low income households shall not be
included in the total housing counts for when the trigger cap is in place: ; and
• The Growth Management Element will include a mechanism to take into account
two or more years of no residential approvals.
Tiln iv,nl mnwtb -nm it aarlgger cap" Wl6L 7 re7_
!ne 1p
Crloufu Ff GLLLIIUULG 67VYYLrL. LL VG u,Lr LCiuY
b' Y
will help average out growth from year to year, but will allow both the City and the
developers greater flexibility in timing for their projects and support predictability.
The definition of affordable housing for the purpose of this General Plan shall be
consistent with the State definition.
Page 2 -38
GM -8 For those residential development approvals..., approvals share shall expire after a 24-
month period, unless extended for special circumstances by the City Council.
Page 2 -40
GM -9 Require that each specific plan include a
Public Facilities Financing Plan that explains how streets, water, wastewater, solid
waste, and parks, all meeting City standards, will be provided to the project. The Plan
must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Manager, based upon criteria
developed in the Growth Management Ordinance, that completion of all necessary
public facilities concurrently with completion of the development specific plan is
economically, physically, and legally feasible.
14
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
GM -10 ... A Public Facilities Plan that provides for the project's fair share of the financing for
the necessary public facilities, but does not provide for the completion of the public
facilities prior to eeeupaney completion of the development due to lack of
contribution by other responsible parties ...
Page 2 -42
GM -17 Consider initiating annexation of Canon Manor Specific Plan Area only if the
following conditions are met:
• Adequate public facilities, meeting Rohnert Park's Rural Estate Residential
standards established for the area, established either separately or as part of the
Specific Plan, are installed prior to annexation, or a program do so, with secure
funding sources, is established to the City's satisfaction;
Page 2 -43
GM -24 Undertake periodic review to monitor General Plan implementation...
The components of the review are... This review, which is in addition to the annual
report required by the State, should incorporate
Page 3 -12
CD -13 Allow only Rural Estate Residential uses or open space and recreation uses along
An4olnma Till Rnnrl
Page 3 -14; second and third paragraphs
While policies related to views and edges that have implications that extend beyond
individual neighborhoods...
Neighborhoods are Rohnert Park's building blocks. Up until 1999, Rohnert Park's
neighborhood structure has been, in many cases, characterized by homes clustered around a
school and a park...
Page 3 -16; second paragraph
... Major arterials such as the Rohnert Park Expressway as well as recent residential arterials
such as Snyder Lane...
Page 3 -24
CD -29 To establish flexibility parking standards, review residential parking requirements in
the Zoning Ordinance, to * bl h flexibility parking standards, and consider
implementing the following provisions and exceptions, where appropriate:
15
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
[place all bulleted items in this policy in italics]
Page 3 -29 and 3 -30
• A 12 to 15 -acre linear park, with the following location and design considerations:
— The linear park should be located beVwoen at the eastern edge of Creekside Middle
School property. And tI-A A,eqern edge, of
The objective is to ensure that the park can provide direct connections between
SSU and Crane Creek.
— The park should be parallel to Snyder Lane in order to provide the most direct
route between the eastern neighborhoods and SSU;
— The western edge of the park should be straight, in the north -south orientation,
with straight bicycle and pedestrian paths to facilitate direct connection to SSU.
The eastern edge of the park need could be curved'
— A minimum 150 -foot width from curb -to -curb (with no maximums established as
part of this General Plan);
The linear park will serve as a recreation center for the adjacent neighborhoods.
The park should be designed to comfortably accommodate a Class I bikeway and
leave enough room for recreational activity, such as informal play areas and
basketball or volleyball courts. See Figure 3.2 -9.
— Provision of a Class I bikeway that provides a direct connection from SSU to
Crane Creek; and
— Landscaping at park edges to define the space and to serve as a buffer from
automobile traffic.
— A minimum of 300 feet and maximum of 500 feet between intersecting streets.
The objective of these distances is to provide minimal interruptions to pedestrians
without creating a barrier between the two adjacent areas.
— Speed calming, speed bumps, and /or landscape features to ensure that traffic flows
at a slow speed;
Page 3 -35
CD -42 Provide an 8 4-0 -acre park along Five C to serve as a neighborhood focal point.
This park should be located directly adjacent to either Snyder Lane or the Five Creek
greenway and should be directly
accessible by bicycle and pedestrian paths to the Qreenway.
16
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
CD -43 Locate the proposed High Density Residential uses adjacent to open space the Five
Creek Greenway or 8 -acre park) and along the proposed north -south arterial and
collector streets to increase accessibility.
Page 3 -37; add new bullet to Policy CD -55
CD -55 Require all development within commercial districts to provide pedestrian amenities,
including:
Pedestrian walkways through parking lots to connect buildings on opposite sides of
parking areas;
Page 3 -38; add new subsection 3.4, Public Art, and new policies CD -57 and CD -58
3.4 Public Art
CD 57 Encourage the integration of art and cultural components in public places and
facilities.
CD 58 Include art and cultural components in areas of new development and redevelopment.
Page 4 -7; Figure 4.3 -3
T he Correct figure number iS 4 1_2 and n r.n"er.ted f gurP_.; which is consistent with the
Revised Draft EIR, will be provided.
Page 4 -10
TR -I Establish LOS C as the minimum standard for all arterial and collector roadway
segments ( "segments ") and intersections, except for (1) those specified segments and
intersections for which allowable LOS standards are otherwise established below; and
(2) segments and intersections that are operating at LOS D or lower at the time an
application for a development roject or a specific plan is submitted If no feasible
improvements exist to improve the LOS The then - existing LOS may be permitted to
be the standard for those segments and intersections in category (2) provided, that the
LOS not be permitted to deteriorate further due to the proposed development project
or specific plan. the following eg ents intWfS0_-,GAieRS, fiff WhiGh thO MiRiMUM
standard hall be LOS D
•- I-R-ohne,44
between Redwood Drive, and GE)mm@r-r.@
-Park
,
Boulevard;
•
between
R-Ahnort Park Expr-@ssway and East Getati
,
Avenue;
17
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
n 1 __ _ 1441 Read, utL. of Railroad Avenue;
4, GA] C r Tl o /Will d A vanue intersection; nnrl
T? 1, nrt Park R r )4Snyder- Lane inter-sea,
LOS shall be evaluated and determined on the basis of either the Highway Capacity
Manual, or other means approved by the City.
From. Roadway Seqmen
TO
LOS _/�n th_mitirr� tin
ro P
idp.nfffied An Ta.hle 4. 1-
(North hny ynrUQny ythhnuniJ)
st8t2
F; ;rm Bf.
PD
Cornmeme Blvd, ptLFIS@
ID
(southbound only,
S22d-Far-m Ct'+te
F'+rm Dr, 2putWl.WLs Rtyd -.
%E-
(southbound only)
y+nteASrw40P
n
/Qnyer I one
Cntoti Aye ri
.B
�F
V Vil F F
interception)
(new
Tcvr
�L
a�
�y
PN
�s
NS";
18
Roadways and Intersections Included in Policy TR -1
Roadway Segments:
From To
Existing'
LOS
NB /SBZ
Standard 3
LOS
NB /SB
Commerce Blvd. State Farm Dr. U.S. 101 Northbound
D/A
F/D
Ramps
Commerce Blvd. Enterprise Old Redwood Hwy
/A
D
(southbound only)
Seed Farm Dr. State Farm Dr. Southwest Blvd.
/B
E
(southbound only)
Petaluma Hill Rd. Valley House Rd. East Railroad Ave.
E/A
D/F
Intersections:
E. Cotati Ave. /Snyder Lane (mitigation in EIR is not feasible)
B
D
Wilfred Ave./Redwood Dr.
B
D
Wilfred Ave./U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps (new intersection)
N/A
D
Commerce Dr. /Golf Course (a newly configured intersection)
B
D
Commerce Blvd/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
B
D
1 Existing LOS based on General Plan Revised Draft EIR, May 2000
2 Northbound/Southbound Direction
3 With mitigation identified in Revised Draft EIR
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
TR -2 Require mitigation measures, as needed, for new development ...
Chapter 2: Land Use and Growth Management requires project proponents to pay
for transportation improvements made necessary by development. Policy TR -1
establishes minimum LOS standards. A traffic analysis will be required for each
specific plan area and mit�gation measures will be required as appropriate, both
within and outside the City limits.
Page 4 -11; Table 4.1 -3
Modify the following sentence under Minor Arterial, Driveways column:
Some Rural Estate Residential lots may have direct access from Eleanor 4v°' a minor
arterial.
Page 4 -14
Table 4.1-4:
Roadway Improvements
Segment From To Improvement
Infill
Rohnert Park Expwy Commerce Blvd
US 101
US 101 Crossing State Farm Dr
US 101 Underpass Golf Course Dr
Snyder Ln Southwest Blvd
Seed Farm Dr
Commerce Blvd
Golf Course Dr
Eastside
Enterprise Dr
Copeland Creek
Fairway Dr
Snyder Ln North side of
Creekside Middle
School
Rohnert Park Expwy Snyder Ln
Petaluma Hill Rd 1,500 feet north of
Keiser Ave
Redwood Dr Widen to 6 lanes
Business Park
New Minor Arterial
Dr
Wilfred Dr
New Major Arterial
Hinebaugh
Upgrade to Major Arterial
Creek
(widen to 4 lanes)
Rohnert Park
New Minor Collector
Expwy
Arlen Dr
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Country Club Dr
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
South side of G Upgrade to Major Arterial
Section (widen to 4 lanes)
Neighborhood
Petaluma Hill Rd Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Railroad Avenue Upgrade with intersection
improvements and turn lanes
(remains as 2 lanes, with
designation as Minor Arterial).
411
Table 4.1-4:
Roadway Improvements
Segment From To Improvement
Eleanor Ave 1999 City Limits
Keiser Ave Snyder Ln
New Linear Park Rd Eleanor Rd
Canon Manor and Southeast
East Cotati Ave Bodway Pkwy
Valley House Dr Bodway Pkwy
Bodway Pkwy MagnoNa Park
Camino Collegio
Alice Dr
Sturdevant Dr
Westside
Wilfred Ave
Dowdell Ave
Labath Ave
Bodway Pkwy
Valley House Rd
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Rohnert Park New Minor Collector
Expwy
Petaluma Hill Rd Upgrade to Minor Arterial or Major
Collector
North side of New Minor Collector
SSU
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Railroad Ave
Upgrade to Major GolleGtor
(widen to 4 Ian
to . New Maior
Collector
Petaluma Hill Rd
Upgrade to Minor Collector
East Cotati Ave
Upgrade to Minor Collector (north
of Alice Dr)
New Minor Collector
(south of Alice Dr)
1999 City Limits Urban Growth
Boundary
Business Park Dr Millbrae Ave
Business Park Dr Urban Growth
Boundary
Source: City of Rohnert Park, Crane Transportation Group
Upgrade to Major Arterial
(widen to 4 lanes)
Upgrade to Minor Collector
Upgrade to Minor Collector (north
of Wilfred Ave)
New Minor Collector
(south of Wilfred Ave)
Page 4 -16
TR -13 Explore the feasibility of undertaking measures to address localized congestion at school drop -
off and pick -up locations.
These would include:
21
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Adjust signal timing at the Snyder Lane intersections with Rohnert Park Expressway,
Southwest Boulevard East Cotati Avenue and at Creekslde Middle School to
accommodate traffic flow during � chool peak traffic periods.
Identify traffic congestion problems that occur during school pick -up and drop -off periods
for each school site in Rohnert Park and implement appropriate measures to improve
traffic conditions.
Page 4 -20
TR -19 Work with Sonoma County to coordinate improvements to major roads in the
unincorporated parts of the Rohnert Park Planning Area.
Major roads include Petaluma Hill Road, Railroad Avenue, Stony Point Road, Todd
Reaa Wilfred Avenue Millbrae Avenue, and the Old Redwood Highway.
TR -20 Work with Sonoma County and ....
Petaluma Hill Road serves as a bypass to US 101 and experiences peak -hour
r" �
congestion. 2--4T 1 Z Table 4.1 -4 calls for new turn lanes and intersection
improvements to Petaluma Hill Road. with new turn —lanes and
Page 4 -27; first and third paragraphs
m,_ _ . 1. , ,, „� tl„ ,,,Rl, RnhnPrt nark hac historically been used for freight service.
1 u,a�
I1C i a11IUdU 11116 ,u,» «.•vu�., ,... - - - --
The segment of railway through Rohnert Park It is owned by the North r * A_ 'I ^ lltheFity
rnT� Northwestern Pacific Railroad Authority, and leased to the T`T 4h * Pacif'”
(NP) u.,; North Coast Rail Authority (NCRA), a consortium of local government
agencies.
Proposition 116 funding was used "r—s been--earmarked for purchase of the ... However,
additional Capital Rehabilitation funds will not be released until... In the March 2000 ballot,
...but both neither secured the necessary two - thirds margin.
Page 4 -28
TR -29 Explore the feasibility of offering additional student discounts on monthly bus passes,
Sonoma County Transit already offers a $30 monthly student bus pass, compared to the $40
adult pass. Golden Gate Transit does not offer a college student discount (only students
under the age of 18 are offered discounts), and there is no ...
Page 5 -5; Figure 5.1 -1: The figure will be corrected per comments received by the Open Space
District on June 16, 2000.
NA
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 5 -6
OS -1 Work with Sonoma County to ensure that land in the Planning Area designated as
Open Space in the Rohnert Park General Plan is maintained as such in rural use or as
permanent open space.
Because the City is not contemplating annexation of any land to the east of Petaluma
Hill Road or open space land in the northwe-steast, development in these areas will
continue to be regulated by the County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The
City can take several steps to encourage the County to maintain the area as in open
space or rural land uses, including:
Page 5 -6 — Delete entire policy OS -2, since the referenced area is now included in the UGB as Rural
Estate Residential.
Page 5 -7
OS -4... Except as provided in OS -414A, a minimum of one acre ...
OS -4A The geographic area suitable for Community Separator mitigation is limited to lands
.. t.._ >,__t. 717.........,.,.. A « /.��..7or.nr1 in F.'imtra rl -7i
within the Runner Park Plattni rAtc.a, (as Ue-fin d ,., .b.,.=... - �.
Within this Planning Area, give first priority to preservation of:
• Lands adjacent to the Urban Growth Boundary;
• T d in Community Sepaf tors•
Page 5 -8
Policy OS -4C, which is a repeat, is deleted. Subsequent policies are renumbered.
Second last paragraph; deletion of repeated words
... Such an agreement would provide for the identification, acquisition, maintenance, and
preservation of open space.
23
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
OS -4E, last sentence:
Whether the land is acquired by the developer or through fees paid to the City by the
developer, the acquisition of the open space land must be in place prior to City appreval -e€
any aevel^,,men issuance of any grading or building permits.
Page 5 -10
OS -9A Undertake a study to explore the feasibility of mitigating open space loss on the East
Side.
Page 5 -16
OS -10 Prepare a Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Master Plan as the implementing
tool for General Plan park and recreation policies and proposals. Ensure that the Plan
includes phasing and riority acquisitions As part of the Plan development, explore
financing mechanisms, including methods for upfront acquisition and development of
priority parklands and fields.
Page 5 -17
OS -13 Develop the approximately 50 -acre area north of Crane Creek west of Petaluma Hill
Road as community recreation fields within City limits. Ensure that development of
the fields is a priority and that this land will not be used for any other use, including
affordable housing for the life of the General Plan. Ensure that ...
Page 5 -21
PF -C Work with the Cotati - Rohnert Park Unified School District (CRPUSD), with the
Bellevue Union School District (BUSD) and the Santa Rosa High School District
SRHSD to ensure availability of adequate sites for schools.
Page 5 -22
PF -3 Require developers to dedicate any necessary school sites to the Cotati - Rohnert Park
Unified School District (CRPUSD).
At the time Specific Plans are developed an analysis of the need for additional school
sites shall be conducted in consultation with the appropriate school district.
Page 5 -25; 4th paragraph, first and third sentences
...the City of Santa Rosa initiated and i-s has now completinged an interim project ... A storage pond
has been completed seiAenst northwest of Rohnert Park, ...
24
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 5 -30; first paragraph under Sonoma County Water Agency
"SCWA provides potable water to more than 500,000 people in Sonoma and Marin counties.
Rohnert Park receives SCWA water from the Petaluma Aqueduct. The sources of the
aqueduct water is are the Dry Creek and Russian River Watersheds. Dry Creek water- is
Gaptur d behind Warm Springs Dam in Lake Sonoma. s v,,-AtP-.r. i.,;;-e--.J-ease-d, and conveyed
down Dry Greek to the Russian River, �wher-e- it is then diverted into the SGWA To
facilitate water supply, the SCWA stores water in two reservoirs, Lake Mendocino and Lake
Sonoma. Water from these reservoirs is conveyed as released flows to Dry Creek and the
Russian River to diversion facilities located near the community of Forestville. Water is then
diverted, treated, and delivered to the SCWA's contractors including Rohnert Park, via the
Agency's water transmission system.
Page 5 -31; last sentence in first full paragraph
The delivery rates are based on historic maximum monthly demand. plus 2'% per -yea
population gr-&,A4h.
Page 5 -33
PF -F Utilize sur-faee purchased water supplies (Table 5.5 -2)...
Page 5 -34
PF -11A Develop a monthly municipal wellfield monitoring program that (i) identifies points
of compliance; (ii) establishes the factors to be considered in determining when
production which exceeds the recharge rates will result in a substantial lowering of
groundwater levels ( "thresholds"); and (iii) includes any other information necessary
to implement PF 11.
PF12 Work with the Sonoma County Water Agency and other water contractors who rely on
the Petaluma Aqueduct System to ensure adequate water deliveries for all the
contractors' needs.
Purchasing additional SCWA water supply can be considered an alternative a ter
execution of the Memorandum of Understanding, until the increased entitlement is
implemented....
PF -13 C-entinue- to expand the GapaGity of the muniripal wells or- establish now wells,
needed.
�. ,
R &I
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Continue to collect and analyze monthly groundwater level data to assist in
management and operation of Rohnert Park's municipal wellfield. Coordinate with
other agencies on regional drawdown impacts.
Page 5 -35
PF -16 Require non - residential uses to implement water conservation practices as a condition
of development.
SCWA's Water Conservation Section currently consists of five full -time staff members
maintains a fuji time water conservation , who assists Rohnert Park and
other SCWA members. and ahoy The Ci imposes the following requirements on
new development:
• All new construction is reviewed for water and wastewater conservation; and
City Ordinance No. 76 requires the City to monitor for water leaks and to
notes customers of identified leaks. Water service may be ...
Page 5 -36; new water conservation policies, per mitigation measures identified in Final EIR
PF -23 Commit to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) of water conservation.
Such measures include:
• Requiring meters for all new connections and billing by volume;
• Establishing a program for retrofitting existing un- metered connections and billing,
by volume;
• Identifying intra- and inter - agency disincentives or barriers to retrofitting mixed -
use commercial accounts with dedicated landscape meters; and
• Conducting a feasibility study to assess the merits of a program to provide
incentives to switch mixed -use accounts to dedicated landscape meters.
PF 24 Implement applicable large landscape conservation programs and incentives, as
identified in the proposed MOU Regarding Water Transmission System Capacity
Allocation During Tempora!y Impairment (4/24/00).
PF 25 Admit a water conservation rate schedule that: increases as the quantity of water used
increases (i.e., a tiered rate schedule); and /or provides seasonal rates or excess -use
surcharges to reduce peak demands during summer months.
Page 6 -3
EC -2 Insure the protection of known archaeological resources in the city by requiring a
records review for any development . proposed in areas that are considered
NQ
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
archaeologically sensitive for Native American and /or historic remains. Require
construction activities and development adjacent to sites of historic or archaeological
resources to avoid degradation by:
• Studying the potential effects of development and construction in the resource;
• Requiring pre- construction surveys and monitoring during any ground
disturbance for all development in areas of historical and archaeological
sensitivity; and
• Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified impacts.
Page 6 -8
EC -C Protect sensitive habitat areas and wetlands, in the following_ order of protection
preference: j) avoidance 2) on -site mitigation and 3) off -site mitigation.
These priorities are in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Game
guidelines.
Page 6 -10
EC -5 Require development in areas with high and moderate wetlands potential and habitat
areas delineated in Figure 6.2 -1, as well as other areas where wetland or habitat for
special- status species is present, to complete assessments of biological resources."
...endangered species The CDFG recommends a minimum buffer, measured outward
from the edof any wetland be established to protect the wetlands.
Page 6 -12
EC -13 Require dedication ^f Maintain creek protection zones extending a minimum of 50
feet (measured from the tops of the banks and a strip of land extending laterally
outward from the top of each bank) for creeks, with extended buffers where
significant habitat areas or high potential wetlands exist (Figure 6.2 -2). Where high
potential wetland or other biological resources exist, require appropriately wider —gyp
to -150 -feet An e-ithep_s- buffers to encompass and protect the resource.
Development shall not ...
Page 6 -15
EC -17 Work with the relevant agencies Sonoma Co Water •Abe...., to ensure that
groundwater supplies are not contaminated in the recharge areas east of the city.
27
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B
Page 6 -14; 5th paragraph, first sentence
Rohnert Park currently derives its water supply from -3-5 31 active wells in 1999 and ...
Page 7 -4; add italicized wording to the end of italicized text in policy HS -I
For areas in the city that have a moderate or high liquefaction potential, information is
available in the California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 117,
Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California.
Page 7 -13
HS -I IA Require any new development south of Valley House Road and east of Bodway
Parkway located in the Petaluma River drainage basin to undertake site improvements
with appropriate drainage measures commensurate with the designed drainage flows
for the Petaluma River and Lichau Creek and subject to hydraulic review by the
Sonoma County Water Agency. e the-f-, is - eff- the,
S
Page 7 -18; second paragraph
The City currently participates in a SCWMA hazardous waste disposal program ... SCWMA
plans to ...
Page 7 -19; add new policy HS -20
HS -20 Support SCWMA in their hazardous waste education efforts.
O.%]
..ESOLUTION NO. 2000 -152
EXHIBIT B -1
EXHIBIT "B -1"
COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN
AND HOUSING ELEMENT
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
Summary of Housing Element Changes
1. Add the following section to the Introduction (p. 9 -1):
HOUSING ELEMENT'S TIMEFRAME
Unlike the other elements of the General Plan, the Housing Element's timeframe
is tied to a five -year "housing needs process" schedule set by the State. Typically,
the State orders the California Housing and Community Development Department
to provide a determination of each region's share of the state housing need. This
requirement has been suspended for a number of years, and the Bay Area's last
Housing Needs Determination occurred ten years ago.
In 1999, the State initiated a housing needs process for the Bay Area that covers
January 1, 1999 — June 30, 2006. Therefore, this Housing Element's timeframe is
consistent with that period.
2. Add the following section to the Introduction (p. 9 -1):
DATA SOURCES
The most current housing data and information available was used during the
preparation of the Housing Element. Unfortunately, the most recent version of the
United States Census, which is a primary source of housing information, is 1990.
The final results of Census 2000 will not be available until 2002, at which time
the Element could be updated.
3. Replace Table 9.1 -1 (p. 9 -4) with the following data:
Table 9.1 -1
Rohnert Park Dwelling Units, 1980 - 2000
Housing Type 1980 1990 2000
Single- family
Multi - family
Mobilehomes /travel trailers
Total
4,819
8,143
8,960
2,837
4,306
5,020
1,299
1,466
1,467
8,955
13,915
15,447
Sources: U.S.Census, California Department of Finance
4. Replace Table 9.1 -2 (p. 9 -5) with the following data and make appropriate changes to
the accompanying text:
Table 9.1 -2
Housing Distribution Comparison, 2000
Housing Type
No. of Units
City
Distribution
County
State
Single- family
detached
7,241
47%
68%
56%
attached
1,719
11%
7%
7%
Multi - family
2 - 4 units in structure
1,048
7%
6%
8%
>_5 units in structure
3,972
26%
12%
24%
Mobilehomes
1,467
9%
7%
5%
5. Add the following sentence to the second -to- the -last paragraph in the Housing
Conditions section (p. 9 -6):
Soils in the Rohnert Park area have a high shrink/swell characteristic. These soil
conditions have been a contributing factor in cracking in foundations, slabs,
driveways, and walkways.
6. Replace the last paragraph of the Housing Conditions section (p. 9 -6) with the
following:
The 152 travel trailers located iii tiie Sonoma Grove Travel Trailer Park provide a
form of very low -cost housing. Because maintenance of the park is regulated and
enforced by the State of California, the trailers were not inspected during the
housing conditions survey. Although travel trailers are not designed for use as
permanent housing, the park's trailers are occupied as such. This is the only
violation of state housing codes that exists, according to the state park inspector.
7. Reword Policy HO -21 and its related program as follows:
Policy HO -21
Maintain the Sonoma Grove Trailer Park as a form of shelter for very low- income
students and households that, in nearly every case, could not afford other housing
available in Rohnert Park
Program
21.1 Consider requests by the trailer park owner for the funding of appropriate
projects that would maintain the park.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: June 1, 2000 - June 30, 2006
2
8. Strike all other references to Sonoma Grove in the Element.
9. Replace the second paragraph of Housing Prices (p. 9 -11) with the following:
By April 2000, however, the median housing price (based on condominium and
single - family home resales) in the Rohnert Park/Cotati /Penngrove areas was
$275,475, significantly exceeding the California median price of $241,600.
However, it was still lower than the $290,000 county median price and the
$469,250 Bay Area median price.
10. Add the following paragraphs to the Farmworkers section (p. 9 -21):
However, farmworker housing remains a regional need, as described in the
Sonoma County Consolidated Plan prepared by the Sonoma County Community
Development Commission:
Agriculture is an important industry in Sonoma County and farm workers are an
important part of the community. The California Human Development
Corporation (CHDC), a nonprofit agency dedicated to bettering the lives of
farmworkers , and other low- income persons, reported that there are 4200
documented farmworker households in Sonoma County. Approximately 75% of
farmworkers reported U. S. citizenship or permanent resident alien status. In
addition, there is a seasonal migrant worker population. The majority of the
migrant workers are young, single males traveling alone who are here for the
harvest. Many of the migrant workers are here illegally.
According to the Sonoma County Housing Element, agricultural employment was
the primary source of income for about 80% of the farmworker households.
Farmworkers have a difficult time locating affordable housing in Sonoma County.
t_ t t: _a 7 L 1' l language U lla an r3 1^::1 liniwcPhnld
Due to a combinatior of 11imi ed Eng�Ish language skills
incomes, the ability to obtain housing loans for home purchase is extremely
limited. For the same reason, rentals are also very difficult to obtain.
More than one -half of the large family, farmworker households live in one or two
bedroom units, resulting in overcrowding. Approximately 12% of these
households have five or more members. The percentage of large families reported
for farmworker households is five times the percentage of large families
countywide. Much of the housing occupied by farmworker households is old and
in need of repairs.
Another unique factor of the farming community is that most migrant
farmworkers are single men who leave their families behind to work in the fields,
and who have no adequate housing. These men live in fields, shacks, barns, or
other unsuitable places. Although there is some overlap in many need areas, the
housing needs of the migrant male differ markedly from the housing needs of
farmworker families.
Providing affordable seasonal and year -round housing for farmworkers and
migrant workers is a need in Sonoma County.
3
12. Add to p. 9 -17:
There are approximately six group care homes licensed in the City that can
accommodate up to 28 elderly individuals, some of whom can be non - ambulatory
or mentally- disordered.
13. Revise first paragraph, top of p. 9 -19:
There are approximately 15 licensed group homes in Rohnert Park for
developmentally disabled adults that can accommodate up to 72 individuals.
14. Add to p. 9 -20:
Insert after "Large families are defined" (first paragraph under the Large families
section) the words: "by the Census ".
15. Revision to p. 9 -22:
Delete the last sentence under the Characteristics of the Homeless ( "A
representative of the City's Department of Public Safety.... ").
16. Replace the first sentence of the University Students section (p. 9 -25) with the
following:
Sonoma State University (SSU) is located adjacent to the Rohnert Park city limits
and receives sewer service from the City.
17. Replace the fourth bullet from the end of the Special Needs summary (p. 9 -27) with:
Farmworker households need affordable housing, including large units as well as
bousina for sinp-le males.
18. Add to p. 9 -28:
General Plan Buildout
As summarized in Table 2.3 -3 of the Land Use and Growth Management
Element, buildout under the General Plan is anticipated to be somewhat lower
than the Projections 2000 estimates. The projected annual population growth rate
of 1 percent will add approximately 8,400 residents to the City, resulting in an
estimated population of 50,400 by 2020.
Job growth is expected to occur at an annual growth rate of 1.9 percent, adding
9,700 jobs for a total of approximately 31,600 jobs by 2020.
19. Replace Table 9.2 -2 (p. 9 -29) and the accompanying text with the following:
ABAG has assigned 11.1 percent of the 1999 -2006 regional housing construction
need, or 25,672 units, to Sonoma County. Of the county's total, 1,462 units have
been preliminarily allocated to the City of Rohnert Park to be developed within its
1999 city limits. This housing goal is further divided among four income
categories that are defined in Table 9.2 -2.
0
Table 9.2 -2
Rohnert Park Regional Housing Need, 1999 - 2006 (Preliminary Allocation)'
Income Group
w/i 1999
City limits
Number of Units
Within
Sol
Total
Share of
Total
Very Low ( <_ 50% of AMIZ)
276
125
401
18.9%
Low (51 - 80% of AMI)
192
78
270
13.1%
Moderate (81 - 120% of AMI)
408
189
597
27.9%
Above Moderate ( >_ 120% of
586
270
856
40.1%
AMI)
Totals
1,462
662
2,124
100%
Source: ABAG Regional Housing Needs Determination, June 1, 2000
' Planning period includes 1 /1 /99 through 6/30/06
2 Area median income established by HUD on an annual basis
The City of Rohnert Park has requested the Association of Bay Area
Governments to revise the determination of its share of the regional housing need.
The City's proposed revision is based upon available data and accepted planning
methodology and is supported by adequate documentation in accordance with
Government Code §65584. The proposed revision is based primarily on ABAG's
improper methodology and ABAG's inaccurate description of the City's sphere of
influence. More information about the City's proposal to revise the determination
of its share of the regional housinp- need is found in correspondence from the City
of Rohnert Park to ABAG dated April 28, 2000, and August 18, 2000 which are
incorporated into this Housing Element by this reference.
The City's share of the regional housing need includes that share of the housing
need of persons at all income levels within the area significantly affected by the
city's general plan (Government Code §5584(a)). Therefore, in this general plan,
the City has provided for its share of the regional housing need in the sphere of
influence proposed by this General Plan (See Table 9.5 -1) since the sphere of
influence is the area significantly affected by this general plan.
20. Add the following to the General Plan Policies section (p. 9 -33):
The Land Use and Growth Management Element provides for the establishment
of an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) that represents the ultimate edge of urban
uses in the Rohnert Park Planning Area by the year 2020. It includes the area
within the 1999 city limits as well as all of the annexation and specific plan areas
provided for in the General Plan. If the proposed 20 -year Urban Growth
Boundary ballot measure is approved by the voters in November 2000, it will
replace Policy GM -2 in the General Plan and may be modified only by public
vote, except in certain circumstances.
5
The UGB will promote a compact urban form that ensures the efficient provision
of services, and preserve agricultural and open space outside of the boundary.
21. Revisions to p. 9 -40:
Change "60" -foot wide street to "52" -foot wide under Site Improvements
section.
Change first three paragraphs of Impact Fees and Exactions section to read as
follows:
The City charges a variety of development impact fees for capital outlay, water
and sewer connections, water reclamation, traffic impacts, and parks /open
space /recreation. For example, water and sewer fees are used to pay for the
increased system capacities required by the development. In some circumstances,
a development impact fee is also assessed on projects for them to "buy in" to the
system of existing infrastructure.
While these fees may affect housing prices, the only alternatives would be their
payment by the existing taxpayers of the City of Rohnert Park or no further
residential development, either of which are infeasible.
A 1998 fee survey compared the development impact fees charged by Rohnert
Park (Table 9.3 -3), including the "buy -in" fee, with six other jurisdictions that
share the same market area and water and sewage treatment systems, and are in a
similar stage of urban development.
The survey found that the development impact fees charged by the City, totaled
It 11 771 fnr a ginolP_fnmily dwellinu (three bedrooms; two baths;
1800 square feet), a total that was $1,674 lower than the average for the
comparable fees of the other six cities.
As shown in Table 9.3 -3, the city's water connection, sewer connection, and parks
and recreation fees are lower for multi - family dwellings than single- family units
in recognition of their generally lower impacts on these systems.
Fees are also charged for services provided by the planning and engineering
departments during the review, entitlement, and construction phases of a
residential project. The study also concluded that these fees are significantly
lower than all surveyed cities, and that the City provides services with limited cost
recovery from applicants for staff time and materials.
22. Add the following to p. 9 -41 (Governmental Constraints section):
City Housing Programs
The inclusionary housing requirement (Program 9.1 of Section 9.5) is a critical
component of the city's housing program and an active means of providing
affordable units to households typically shut out of the housing market.
Developers of residential projects are required to rent or sell 15 percent of its units
at prices or rents affordable to low- or moderate - income households. The
inclusionary program is also intended to promote the economic integration of
no
lower- income households in neighborhoods and the dispersion of affordable units
throughout the city. The requirement may also provide an incentive for developers
to take the next step and increase their project's share of affordable units to 25
percent in order to qualify for an affordable housing density bonus.
The inclusionary requirement is also intended to offset the negative effects of new
market -rate housing on the provision of affordable housing. The construction of
above - moderate income housing depletes the amount of available residential land,
while contributing to rising land prices because of a greater scarcity of
developable sites. Market -rate housing also exacerbates the affordable housing
problem by creating greater needs for goods and services typically provided by
low- income employees.
There has been extensive debate over the question of who bears the cost of an
inclusionary requirement. Depending on the relative strength of the housing
market, the costs may be incurred by:
• Land owners, who may receive a lower price for their land if developers are
expecting a lower profit margin from the inclusionary requirement
• Developers, who may have to accept lower profits if housing prices cannot be
raised
• The purchasers of market -rate units, who may have to pay higher housing
prices if the local and regional housing supply is limited and prices are at least
as high in areas outside the city.
In the currently- strong housing market, it is possible that the costs of the
inclusionary housing requirement will be incurred by all three groups.
It is not anticipated that this requirement will have the effect of diverting
residential development to other Sonoma County jurisdictions, since inclusionary
requirements have been adopted by Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Healdsburg, Cotati,
Sonoma, and Sebastopol. The Windsor General Plan contains an inclusionary
housing policy that has not yet been implemented.
By limiting the inclusionary requirement to 15% and providing alternative means
of compliance, the program is not seen as an undue or onerous constraint on the
provision of market -rate housing.
23. Revise Table 9.4 -1 (p. 49) to include the 6025 Commerce Blvd. Site and revise the
potential units for Mountain Shadows Apartments, as follows:
7
Table 9.4 -1
Potential Residential Development - 1999 City Limits
Potential Redevelopment
Southwest Blvd. Mixed Use 7.00 50 multi - family Moderate, low,
Ce Ilel u�n�a •.wr.
6920 Commerce Blvd. High 1.25 30 multi - family Moderate, low,
Density units v. low
Total 596 dwelling
units
24. Delete first paragraph of the "Approved Residential Projects" section (p. 9 -50) and
add the following paragraph to the "Private Land" section (p. 9 -51):
A 176 -unit apartment project is proposed for an 8.5 -acre site opposite the
Doubletree Hotel that is proximate to the freeway, schools, parks, and commercial
services. One- to three- bedroom units would be arranged in three -story structures.
The project's developer plans to fulfill an unmet demand for high - quality rental
housing generated by the area's growing high -tech businesses.
25. Revisions to Private Land section, p. 9 -51:
Add to end of fourth paragraph:
The Mixed Use designation will allow residential development as a permitted use
on the following sites:
Use
Use
Approved/
Affordability
Location
Acres
Potential Units
Classification
Constructed Projects (1999)
Muirfield Apartments
24 apartments
Very low
Honeybrook 11
26 single- family
Above - moderate
Rohnert Park West
41 single- family
Above- moderate
Approved Projects
1309 Maurice Avenue
N. Comm.
<1.0
7 apartments
Low
Potential Development
Mountain Shadows
Commer.
8.50
176 apartments
Moderate
Apts.
6025 Commerce Blvd.
Mixed Use
8.36
40 multi - family
Moderate, low, v.
units
low
1400 E. Cotati .Avenue
High
.75
22 multi - family
Moderate, low, v.
Density
units
low
City Center
Mixed Use
3.72
180 multi - family
Moderate, low, v.
low
Potential Redevelopment
Southwest Blvd. Mixed Use 7.00 50 multi - family Moderate, low,
Ce Ilel u�n�a •.wr.
6920 Commerce Blvd. High 1.25 30 multi - family Moderate, low,
Density units v. low
Total 596 dwelling
units
24. Delete first paragraph of the "Approved Residential Projects" section (p. 9 -50) and
add the following paragraph to the "Private Land" section (p. 9 -51):
A 176 -unit apartment project is proposed for an 8.5 -acre site opposite the
Doubletree Hotel that is proximate to the freeway, schools, parks, and commercial
services. One- to three- bedroom units would be arranged in three -story structures.
The project's developer plans to fulfill an unmet demand for high - quality rental
housing generated by the area's growing high -tech businesses.
25. Revisions to Private Land section, p. 9 -51:
Add to end of fourth paragraph:
The Mixed Use designation will allow residential development as a permitted use
on the following sites:
Reword first bullet to:
An 8.36 -acre vacant site on the west side of Commerce Boulevard, north of
Hinebaugh Channel (approximately 6025 Commerce Blvd.). Although the rear of
the parcel is unsuitable for residential development due to its proximity to the
freeway, the site could accommodate multi - family units on the front portion.
Access and other infrastructure necessary to support residential use on the site are
already in place.
26. Reword first bullet of Potential Redevelopment section, p. 9 -52, to:
The owner of an office complex at 6920 Commerce Boulevard has expressed
an interest in replacing it with an apartment project. Given its location in front
of an existing apartment complex, the development of approximately 30
multi - family units on the site through a use permit is feasible. Existing access
and other infrastructure is adequate to accommodate residential development
on the site.
27. Reword end of second bullet of Potential Redevelopment section to:
Multi- family development of perhaps 50 units could be approved on the site,
although consolidating the site under one ownership would be problematic.
Existing access and other infrastructure appears adequate to accommodate
residential development on the site.
28. Update potential unit counts for Northeast Specific Plan and overall potential units in
Sphere of Influence (Table 9.4 -2, p. 9 -53)
29. Add the following to the Growth Areas section (p. 9 -53):
The ranaP rd rPCldentlnl denCttics will provide onnorhinities for housing at all
..b., r- rr
income levels. In general, development within Rural Estate and Low Density
areas will produce housing within the above - moderate income range, Medium
Density will accommodate above - moderate and moderate - income housing, and
High Density and Mixed Use will provide opportunities for lower- income housing
as well as higher- income units.
Development outside of the 1999 city limits will occur within five designated
specific plan areas (depicted in Figure 2.4 -1 of the Land Use and Growth
Management Element). Except for the provisions of the Growth Management
program, no phasing requirements have been imposed on these areas, and
property owners of any specific plan area could submit a specific plan and
annexation request to the City after adoption of the General Plan. Given the
considerable growth pressures in the area and the active interest in development
expressed by numerous property owners and owner representatives, it is likely
that one or more specific plan will be prepared and submitted shortly after
adoption of the General Plan.
If such plans are not forthcoming, the City could take an active lead in the
preparation of the specific plans, as it did for the Wilfred - Dowdell Specific Plan,
which is scheduled for adoption in 2000. In that case, the City brought together
X
the many property owners in the area to formulate a plan, and paid for the plan's
preparation, with deferred reimbursement from the property owners.
30. Replace the City Water Supply discussion (p. 9 -56) with the following:
The City of Rohnert Park currently derives its drinking water supply from
municipal wells and the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) Petaluma
Aqueduct. The sources of the aqueduct water are from the Dry Creek and Russian
River Watersheds. Rohnert Park's average annual use of water currently exceeds
its entitlement, but the City has been able to purchase additional water from the
unused allocation of another SCWA member.
As of 2000, the City of Rohnert Park has approved a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the SCWA and the eight public parties to whom
the SCWA provides water supplies. As part of the MOU, the City will receive an
interim allocation until September 2010, when it is anticipated that additional
water supplies will become available from SCWA. The planned SCWA
entitlement will fulfill future growth demands from 2010 through 2020, and allow
the City to reserve municipal wellfield production for backup and emergency
supply purposes. However, during the interim, the City will continue to rely on
their municipal wellfield as a source of water to supplement the SCWA allocation
schedule.
31. Add sentence to end of existing first paragraph of Public Facilities Section (p. 9 -56):
Some public facilities may be deferred, but only under specific provisions of
Policies GM -11 and —12.
32. Reword First -Time Homebuyer bullet to update program information (p. 9 -58):
The CDCRP provides in downpayment assistance as a silent second for qualifying
low- and median - income, first -time homebuyers. Up to $15,000 is available to
low - income households and $10,000 to median - income households. No interest is
charged on the deferred loan, and the loan is forgiven at the end of ten years if the
homebuyer lives in the house as their primary residence for the entire period. The
loans are available to households. both within and outside of the redevelopment
project area.
Twenty -six loans will have been approved by mid -July 2000, assisting one very
low - income household, 15 low- income households, and 10 median - income
households, and more than $300,000 will have been committed.
In May 2000, the CDCRP authorized an additional $500,000 in funding for the
program.
33. Add to the end of page 9 -60:
The CDCRP's Housing Fund contained approximately $2,900,000 for housing
programs as of July 1, 2000. Additions to the fund during the planning period
(2000 to 2006) are estimated to be $7,200,000, for a total of $10,100,000.
Housing programs that the CDC is likely to undertake during the planning period
are:
10
• Housing administration services provided by the City
• Homeless prevention services
• First Time Homebuyer /Silent Second Program
• Owner- Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program
• Preservation of Country Club Village Apartments
• Multi- family housing construction assistance (such as City Center and within
specific plan areas)
• A mobilehome park acquisition program
34. Delete funding source for the Sonoma County Rental Information and Mediation
Service (p. 62)
35. Change timeframe for implementing zoning ordinance amendments to July 1, 2001
throughout programs, except for inclusionary requirement, which is changed to
March 2001.
36. Add the following program to Goal C:
Work with other Sonoma County jurisdictions to explore the feasibility of
enacting a housing impact fee on businesses that generate a significant number of
jobs in the community.
Responsibility: City Manager, Planning Director
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 1, 2001
37. Add the following program to Goal C:
Amend the Zoning Ordinance to add single room occupancy housing as a
permitted use in districts allowing multi - family housing.
SRO's are residential facilities in which furnished rooms are rented on a weekly
or monthly basis and which provide common facilities and services for laundry,
cleaning, and meals. They can provide transitional or permanent housing for
homeless individuals or couples.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 1, 2001
38. Add Program 10.2A:
Refrain from considering or approving the report referenced in HO 10.2 until the
City Council is able to adopt zoning regulations which, to the maximum extent
feasible and legally possible, protect and maintain the affordable housing
provided to the residents of the City of Rohnert Park by mobile home parks in
Rohnert Park.
11
If this ordinance is not in effect within one hundred and twenty days of the
adoption of the General Plan, this Program 10.2A shall be of no further force and
effect.
Responsibility: Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: August 1, 2000 — November 30, 2000
39. Add to Program 10.3:
...by, in part, contacting the entities interested in participating in the First Right of
Refusal program and the Sonoma County Housing Authority.
40. Add new program (HO 1 IA):
Encourage and facilitate to the extent possible, participation by property owners
in federal for -sale and rental housing assistance programs that maintain
affordability for very low and low income residents.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff, CDCRP
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 1, 2000 — June 30, 2006
41. Add the following to Program 16.1 :
Potential shelter locations include the following sites that may become available
after construction of the new city hall: former library, former city hall, and
former finance office building, and any school sites determined to be surplus.
A/� '1 1 1 T/'� T. GG 1'__ 1_'1_'`_"
G+/-. Aaa to Goal i7v -r: ui5auluLy
43. Reword Policy HO -20 (p. 9 -80) to replace "correcting unsafe" with "improving" as
follows:
HO -20 Work towards improving living conditions in the Canon Manor area.
44. Replace Table 9.5 -1 with the following page.
45. Changes to p. 9 -87:
Replace first word "many" with "several."
Strike "severely" from first bullet.
Reword second and third bullets to:
• Initiation of the 1997 General Plan update — Closely following adoption of
the 1995 Housing Element, the Council initiated another General Plan update,
and some actions were deferred until its completion.
. Unclear identification of implementation responsibilities — Program actions
did not identify the person or group responsible for their implementation, and
there was a lack of follow - through.
12
Table 9.5 -1
Quantified Objectives for Housing; January 1, 1999 - July 1, 2006
Conserved Affordable Units
Enforcement of Chap. 9.70 733 733 1,466 units
Country Club Village 41 22 63 units
Totals 41 755 733 1,529 units
*assumes 225 market -rate units per year, divided between above - moderate and moderate
income, plus 15% inclusionary affordable units
13
V. Low
Income Group
Low Moderate
Above-
Moderate
Totals
New Construction
Honeybrook II (1999)
26
26 SF units
Rohnert Pk. West
41
41 SF units
(1999)
Muirfield Apts. (1999)
24
24 MF units
Mountain Shadows
176
176 MF units
Apts.
1309 Maurice Avenue
7
7 MF units
City Center
34
23
123
180 MF units
Southwest Blvd.
4
4
42
50 MF units
Center
6025 Commerce Blvd.
3
3
34
40 MF units
6920 Commerce Blvd.
2
2
26
30 MF units
1400 E. Cotati Avenue
2
2
18
22 MF units
Specific Plan Areas
52
100
506
506
1,164 units
Totals
121
141
925
573
1,760 units*
Rahahilitatprl Units
CDCRP Rehab Program
Inside project area
7
7
14 households
Outside project
8
8 households
area
Christmas in April
7
7 households
Totals
7
15
7
29 households
Conserved Affordable Units
Enforcement of Chap. 9.70 733 733 1,466 units
Country Club Village 41 22 63 units
Totals 41 755 733 1,529 units
*assumes 225 market -rate units per year, divided between above - moderate and moderate
income, plus 15% inclusionary affordable units
13