The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016/03/22 City Council Resolution 2016-027RESOLUTION NO. 2016-027 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK, PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN WHEREAS, the City, has prepared planning applications proposing the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan (PROJ2014-0002), General Plan Amendments (PLGP2016- 0001), and Zoning Ordinance Amendments (PLRZ2016-0001), and approval of a Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") (PLEN2016-0001) in connection with the proposed Central Rohnert Park Plan located south of Golf Course Drive, west of the SMART railroad tracks, east of Highway 101 and north of Avram Avenue / Santa Alicia Drive (the "Plan"), in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("RPMC"); and WHEREAS, the City, as the applicant, is proposing adoption of the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan that was initiated in 2013. The current Plan, as proposed, would result in a PDA document that establishes a vision for a vibrant area with a mix of land uses, which includes strategies to support a walkable downtown destination and multimodal transportation hub with access to a variety of jobs, housing, shopping, services, and transportation options. WHEREAS, for the environmental review, the City of Rohnert Park, acting as the Lead Agency under CEQA, published a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Plan. The NOP was distributed for a 30 -day comment period beginning on October 18, 2015 and held a scoping meeting on Wednesday, November 18, 2015. The City then initiated work on a Draft EIR for the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City completed the Draft EIR on December 18, 2015 and circulated it to affected public agencies and interested members of the public for the required 45 day public comment period from December 18, 2015 to February 1, 2016; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2016, the City published the Final EIR for the Plan by incorporating: 1) the Draft EIR; 2) comments received about the Draft EIR and responses to those comments; 3) changes, clarifications and corrections to the Draft EIR; and 4) appendices; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, on March 8 and March 22, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearings at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the Final EIR; and 2016-027 WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR as well as the information presented by staff and the public; and WHEREAS, Section 21000, et. seq., of the Public Resources Code and Section 15000, et. seq., of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (the "CEQA Guidelines"), which govern the preparation, content, and processing of environmental impact reports, have been fully implemented in the preparation of the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the RPMC, public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners within an area exceeding a three hundred foot radius of the subject property and a public hearing was published for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first public hearing in the Community Voice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park ("Council") makes the following findings, determinations and recommendations with respect to the Final EIR for the proposed Plan: 1. The above recitals are true and correct, and material to this Resolution. 2. The Council has independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the Final EIR and all written documentation and public comments prior to making recommendations on the proposed Plan; and 3. The Final EIR was prepared and reviewed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and the City's local CEQA procedures; and 4. The Final EIR constitutes an adequate, accurate, objective, and complete EIR in compliance with all legal standards; and The information and analysis contained in the Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment as to the environmental consequences of the proposed Plan; and 6. The documents and other materials, including without limitation staff reports, memoranda, maps, letters and minutes of all relevant meetings, which constitute the administrative record of proceedings upon which the City Council's resolution is based are located at the City of Rohnert Park, City Clerk, 130 Avram Ave., Rohnert Park, CA 94928. The custodian of records is the Planning Manager. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on the basis of the evidence contained in the administrative record of the Final EIR, the City Council finds based on the information submitted following the conclusion of the public comment periods on the Draft EIR and the responses to comments provide clarification to the information contained in the Draft EIR and do not describe 1) a new substantial environmental impact resulting from the project or from new mitigation measures; 2) a substantial increase in an environmental impact; or 3) a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure that clearly would lessen the environmental impacts of the project that has not been adopted. The new information provided in the Final EIR does not constitute "significant new information" within the meaning of CEQA so as to require recirculation of the Final EIR. 2016-027 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5) and such information does not change the analysis or determinations of significance of potential impacts. The responses to comments demonstrate the Draft EIR contains sufficient mitigation measures to minimize or reduce impacts to a less than significant level; and revised language provided in the responses to comments is intended to clarify the required action and intent of the measures to ensure compliance; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby certifies the Final EIR attached as Exhibit A, incorporating the mitigation measures provided as Exhibit B and directs the filing of a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that after considering the Final EIR and in conjunction with making these findings, the City Council hereby finds that pursuant to Section 15092 of the CEQA Guidelines, approval of the Project will result in significant effects on the environment; however, the City eliminated of substantially lessened these significant effects where feasible, and has determined that the remaining significant effects are found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 and acceptable under Section 15093; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Exhibit C (Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations) and Exhibit B (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) of this Resolution provide findings required under Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines for significant effects of the Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Exhibit C of this Resolution provides the findings required under Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines relating to accepting adverse impact of the Plan due to overriding considerations. The City has balanced the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Plan against the unavoidable environmental risks that may result, and finds that the specific economic legal social technological and other benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, The City Council hereby adopts the Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit C; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Exhibit D of this Resolution summarizes potentially significant impacts that become less than significate with mitigation; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby approves the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached as Exhibit B to this Resolution and requires the Plan to comply with all of the mitigation measures contained therein. The Council finds that these mitigation measures are fully enforceable on the Plan and shall be binding upon the City and affected parties. 2016-027 DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 22nd day of March 2016. ATTEST: &.&LA ()Anne M. Buergler, City Clerk CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Attachment: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, and Exhibit D AiI.ANOTU: Ole CMAJNAN: a STAFFORD: -Aj--e MACKENZIE: �� BELFORTE. AVES: ( 5 ) NOES: ( Q ) ABSENT: ( 0 ) ABSTAIN: ( O ) I, JOANNE BUERGLER, CITY CLERK of the City of Rohnert Park, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 22nd day of March, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: i ►1Ie ( (`o�nc�lmcmbef Abanwh)' Nku1 io(Avl S+64-�(-d , War -Ken I and May°r Pie lf6C+e NOES: Novie ( o) ABSENT: NO n 2 ( °-) A STAN: Nof►e � °� ek Anne M. Buergler, City Cle 2016-027 EXHIBIT A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT entral ohnert ark Priority Development Area Plan City of Rohnert Park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Final Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments SC H # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: AECOM February 2016 THERE IS A TRAIN COMING TO TOWN SCTA ft Til■r M�e4aok iptral � ,'ohnert 'ark. Priority Developn-crit Area Plan City of Rohnert park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Final Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments SC H # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: 1=W&I February 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Se ction 1 INTRO DUC TION...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Use of the Final EIR..................................................................................................... 1-2 2 COMMENTS AND REPONSES TO COMM[E!VTS............................................................................. 2-1 2.1 List of Commenters on the Draft EIR.............................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Comments and Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR.................................................. 2-1 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments.............................................................. 2-1 3 REVISIONS TO THEDRAFT EIR...............................................................................................3-1 Appendices A Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Figures No table of contents entries found Tables Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR.............................................................. 2-1 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EPR, Response to Comments i ACRONYMS AND OTHER ABBREVIATIONS AFY Acre-feet per year Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City City of Rohnert Park HAWK high-intensity activated crosswalk beacon MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission MUP multi -use path NOP Notice of Preparation PDA Priority Development Area PDA Plan Priority Development Area Plan Proposed Plan Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan RRFB rectangular rapid flashing beacon SCTM/10 Sonoma County Travel Model SMART Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit TDM transportation demand management U.S. 101 U.S. Highway 101 UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VMT vehicular miles traveled WSA Water Supply Assessment CentralRohnertParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan ii Final EK Responseto Conirents 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Rohnert Park (City) has directed the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan (proposed plan) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). In accordance with Section 15088 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of Rohnert Park, as the lead agency, has reviewed the comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan and has prepared written responses to the comments received. The City asked for input from federal, State, and local agencies; organizations; and members of the public regarding the issues that should be evaluated in the EIR. Specifically, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR on October 28, 2015 and conducted a scoping meeting on November 18, 2015. The Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 201510208 1) was received on December 18th, 2015 by the State Clearinghouse, and circulated to the public for review and comment. The City conducted a 45 -day public review period for the Draft EIR that concluded on February 1, 2016. The City has now prepared this Final EIR document, which includes: • The Draft EIR, with minor revisions detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR • Public comments received on the Draft EIR • Responses to written comments • The list of organizations that provided comments on the Draft EIR Chapter 2 of this Final EIR includes the written comments received on the Draft EIR and responses to environmental topics raised in these comments (as required by the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132) and to non -environmental topics included in these comments. The responses to comments respond to the comments received on the Draft EIR. To assist the reader, each response to a comment is also preluded by a brief summary of the comment. In some instances, responses to comments may warrant modification of the text of the Draft EIR. In those cases, the changes compiled in Chapter 3, "Revisions to the Draft EIR," amend the text of the Draft EIR. The text deletions are shown in strikeout (s#eet) and additions are shown in underline underline. The minor is summarized in Chapter 3 of this EIR do not change the findings presented in the Draft EIR. The aforementioned responses to comments document and the Draft EIR together constitute the Final EIR that is being considered by the City of Rohnert Park. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR Response to Comments 1-1 1.1 USE OF THE FINAL EIR The Final EIR includes revisions to the Draft EIR and the Responses to Comments. The Final EIR serves as the environmental document to inform the Planning Commission and City Council's consideration of the proposed plan, either in whole or in part, or one of the alternatives to the project discussed in the Draft EIR. As required by Section 15090(a)(1)-(3) of the CEQAGuidelines, a Lead Agency, in certifying a Final EIR, must make the following three determinations: 1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project. 3. The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis. As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each fmding supported by substantial evidence in the record. The possible fmdings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 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. 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. CentralRohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 1-2 Final EIR Response to Comments 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS This section of the Final EIR contains comment letters received during the public review period for the Draft EIR, which concluded on February 1, 2016. The EIR is an informational document intended to disclose to the City and the public the environmental consequences of approving and implementing the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan (proposed plan) or one of the alternatives to the plan described in the Draft EIR. In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(a), the City has prepared written responses to all comments received during the public comment period that address environmental issues related to the proposed plan. The focus of the responses to comments is on the disposition of significant environmental issues that are raised in the comments, as specified by Section 15088(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. 2.1 LIST OF COMMENTERS ON THE DRAFT EIR Comments on the Draft EIR were received as written comments submitted to the City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department during and shortly following the public review comment period. Table 2-1, below, indicates the numeric designation for each comment letter received, the author of the comment letter, and the date received. Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR Letter I Commenter I Date 1 1 County of Sonoma Permit and Resource ManagementDepartment 01/26/2016 2 1 California Department ofTransportation(Caltmns) 102/01/2016 2.2 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR The written comments received on the Draft EIR and the responses to those comments are provided in this section. Each comment letter is reproduced in its entirety and is followed by the response(s) to the letter. Where a commenter has provided multiple comments, each comment is indicated by a line bracket and an identifying number in the margin of the comment letter. 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments COM MENT LETTER 1 — COUNTY OF SONOM A PERM IT AND RESOURCE MANAGEM ENT DEPARTMENT Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EII2 Response to Comments 2-1 COUNTY OF SONOMAi Letter � PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT January 26, 2016 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 954032829 (707) 565-1900 FAX (707) 565-1103 Jeffrey S. Beiswenger, Planning Manager City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park CA 94928 1beiswen9er@[oGitv.2ro Re: Draft EIR for Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan The County of Sonoma appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the draft EIR for the Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan. The County strongly supports city -centered growth, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle path connectivity, and the transit opportunities featured by the Area Plan. In fact, many of the goals and objectives of the County's General Plan are in line with those of the draft Area Plan. With respect to the Draft EIR, the County submits the following comments for the City's consideration: Transportation and Traffic The proposed plan provides for the construction of approximately 835 new residential units and 823,000 square feet of additional commercial, office and light industrial uses, yet the Draft EIR finds no significant cumulative impacts to the greater regional transportation system, other than to Highway 101. The traffic impacts resulting from the residential and commercial development envisioned by the plan would not be confined to the City limits. There would be increased demands on the County circulation system as well. The interconnectivity of traffic between the City and the adjoining County areas requires interagency coordination and cooperation in order to adequately address the effects of growth on both the local and regional circulation system. Cumulative traffic impacts cannot be mitigated without meaningful consideration of the roadways beyond the City limits. The costs of improvements to the County circulation network should be equitably distributed among those who cumulatively contribute to the need for such improvements. Accordingly, the County encourages the adoption of policies which would provide for the equitable distribution of costs through fair share funding by future development within the project area. 1-2 A more thorough explanation of the cumulative impact analysis with respect to the regional transportation system is also warranted. The Draft EIR should also describe the threshold of 1-3 significance used in the analysis and indicate whether the density of the project area is comparable to the density assumed by the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM/10). Central Rohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-2 Final EK ResponsetoConnnents Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan Draft EIR - Comments January 26, 2016 Page 2 of 2 Hydrology The Draft EIR indicates that groundwater levels around the City's well field appear to be stable, however, the Draft EIR does not specifically analyze the project's impact on groundwater supply or the potential reduction in groundwater discharge to streams as a result of increased pumping. The Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2014, 14 indicates that there was a cumulative groundwater -storage reduction between 1976 and 2010 as well as a reduction in groundwater discharge to streams in the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed. A thorough analysis of these water resources are necessary to determine the potential for impacts and the appropriate mitigation if warranted. Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns. We appreciate the hard work and dedication required to create the Area Plan and commend your service to the community of Rohnert Park. I may be reached by phone at (707) 565-7387 or by email at olanda.solano sonoma- countv.orcl should you have any questions. s:\comp\pprs\responses - by year\2016\16-15-01 draft eir central rp priority development Central Rohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea flan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-3 RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-1 The commenter thanks the City for the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR and expresses the County's support for many of the goals and policies of the proposed plan, highlighting the plan area 's focus on city - centered growth, enhancedpedestrian and bicycle path connectivity, and transit opportunities. The goals and objectives of the County's General Plan are in line with those of the proposed plan. The City acknowledges the comment. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-2 The commenter summarizes the project and comments that the resulting development would not be confined to the City's limits, but would also create increased demands on the County circulation system. The commenter questions why there are no other significant cumulative impacts to the regional transportation system, other than Highway 101. The Draft EIR transportation chapter (Chapter 3.9) addresses impacts to regional roadways, given that it represents a programmatic EIR analysis for a master plan (the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan or proposed plan). As such, the evaluation of potential impacts focuses on those areas most likely to be impacted, which are largely comprised of existing developed areas in the City of Rohnert Park within and near the plan area. Areas outside of the City limits are generally less developed and, therefore, less likely to attract traffic generated by development within the plan area. While development within the plan area can be expected to contribute some share of additional traffic to roadways serving these areas, the majority of traffic generated by development within the PDA would be expected to use U.S. 101 for regional access and a combination of major arterials (e.g., Rohnert Park Expressway and Golf Course Drive) and connecting streets for local access. In particular, the existing development pattern within Sonoma and Marin Counties is characterized by a mix of developed (urban and suburban) and undeveloped (rural) areas, with developed areas largely concentrated along the north—south U.S. 101 corridor. U.S. 101 also serves as the primary regional link between Sonoma County and the rest of the Bay Area, providing access to State Route 37, Interstate 580, and other major highways and thoroughfares. Thus, given the proposed plan's location adjacent to U. S. 101, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of the regional traffic generated by development within the plan area would utilize U. S. 101, either to access developed areas of Sonoma County along U.S. 101 (e.g., Santa Rosa or Petaluma) or to reach otherparts of the Bay Area. By analyzing potential impacts to U. S. 101 (Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-19 and 3.9-20), the Draft EIR analyzed the regional roadway facilities expected to be most impacted by development within the plan area. Recognizing that development within the plan area would add some traffic to these other roadway facilities, the City is committed to working in cooperation with the County to address the proposed plan's contribution to traffic growth and impacts to both local and regional roadways, including those outside of the City of Rohnert Park. This would also be consistent with Policy TR -21 of the City of Rohnert Park General Plan that calls for establishment of a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements, thereby creating a mechanism for development projects within the City of Rohnert Park to contribute impact fees toward roadway improvements in Sonoma County. The City has recently agreed to take the lead in preparing this study to establish a regional mitigation plan, with preparation of this study anticipated to commence in the spring of 2016. Once the regional impact fee is Central Rohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-4 Final EIR, Response to Comments adopted, future development within the plan area will be subject to payment, thereby contributing a fair share towards the funding of regional roadway improvements. Specific County roadways where future development under the proposed plan may add traffic, and where the Sonoma County General Plan 2020 (SCGP) has identified future improvements that payment of the regional impact fee could contribute funding toward implementation, include the following. • Petaluma Hill Road — consider improvements, such as intersection improvements, turn lanes, and signals to reduce congestion (SCGP Policy CT-6aaa, Figure CT -1g) • Community of Penngrove —identify and implement a combination of local and regional roadway improvements to reduce congestion in Penngrove (SCGP Policies CT -6v, CT -6w, CT -6x, and CT -6y) • Stony Point Road — consider additional turn lanes at RPX intersection to reduce congestion (SCGP Policy CT-6bbb); widen corridor to four lanes (SCGP Figure CT -1g) RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-3 The commenter suggests a more thorough explanation of cumulative impact analysis to the regional transportation system and that the Draft EIR describes the threshold of significance used in the analysis and indicate whether the density of the project area is comparable to the density assumed by the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM/10). As discussed in Response to Comment 1-2, potential impacts to the regional transportation system are discussed in Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-19 and 3.9-20, in the context of impacts to U.S. 101. The Sonoma County Travel Demand Model (SCTM\10) was utilized in the assessment of cumulative traffic impacts. The model's future year scenario of 2040 reflects buildout of current general plans throughout Sonoma County, including build -out within the County and incorporated municipalities in the County (the cities of Rohnert Park, Cotati, Healdsburg, Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Cloverdale, Sebastopol, and Sonoma and the Town of Windsor). For the model's traffic analysis zones (TAZ) encompassing the plan area, the added development potential for buildout under the current Rohnert Park General Plan (i.e., without adoption of the proposed plan) includes 269 residential units and 628,897 square feet of non-residential uses. In comparison, as shown in Draft EIR Table 2-3 (pp. 2-15 and 2-16), the proposed plan estimates an added development potential of 835 residential units and 822,324 square feet of non-residential uses. The proposed plan, therefore, would allow for a higher density of development than the City's General Plan and the assumptions used in the County's traffic model. The traffic volumes and traffic operations calculations presented in the "Future plus Project" scenario of the proposed plan's traffic impact study (contained in Draft EIR Appendix E) reflect the effects of this additional increment of cumulative growth beyond what is assumed in the SCTM\10 model. While the proposed plan would allow for more units and more non-residential square footage than assumed in the current SCTM\l0 model, it is critical to discern the differences in automobile traffic generation and travel patterns that would result from implementation of the proposed plan versus the more suburban type of development pattern currently evident in the vicinity. On a per-unit or per -square foot basis, the PDAis anticipated to generate fewer automobile trips than conventional development. A greater share of trips is projected to be made by walking, bicycling, and transit. Development in the plan area (both existing and future) would be increasingly transit -focused, both in its proximity to existing local and regional bus routes as well as its proximity to the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-5 SMART commuter rail line. Implementation of the proposed plan would also result in a more balanced jobs - housing ratio within Central Rohnert Park, meaning that the potential for existing and future residents to live closer to their workplace also increases (thereby, resulting in a potential shift away from auto trips as well as towards shorter driving distances). Finally, the types of non-residential uses envisioned by the proposed plan are oriented to local users. The proposed plan places a focus on local -serving and downtown retail versus big -box or auto -oriented retail. This type of land use not only tends to draw fewer auto trips than big -box shopping center type uses, but associated auto trips also tend to be shorter in length and oriented to/from more proximate areas. The combined effects of this type of development pattern lead to fewer trips extending beyond the City and onto the County/regional roadway network, substantially limiting the potential traffic impacts that implementation of the proposed plan may create on these roadways. As indicated in the Draft EIR transportation chapter and traffic impact study and considered in the Draft EIR alternatives chapter (Chapter 6), the proposed plan would increase automobile traffic levels, but the amount to which the proposed plan would affect regional facilities under future cumulative conditions is expected to be similar or only slightly greater than would otherwise occur assuming build -out of the plan area under existing zoning utilizing more suburban and automobile -oriented development patterns. As discussed in Section 6.3 of the DEIR, although the proposed plan would add traffic to several local intersections, it also includes traffic signal and lane geometry improvements that would improve these intersection operations to acceptable conditions and mitigate the effects of the additional traffic. Without the proposed plan, these improvements would not be in place and development in the plan area under existing zoning would be expected to cause four intersections to degrade to unacceptable conditions, as addressed in Section 6.3.4 of the DEIR. Existing zoning and development patterns also would not feature the land use and transportation improvements under the proposed plan that would support reductions in automobile parking and promote alternative modes, such as transit, biking, and walking, both of which are critical to reducing vehicle -miles travelled (VMT) and its associated effects on both the local and regional roadway network. Furthermore, as noted in Response to Comment 1-2 above, the City will be preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements that, once adopted, will require future development in the plan area to contribute fair -share funding of regional roadway improvements. Regarding thresholds of significance, the Draft EIR describes the thresholds of significance applied for intersection and freeway operations in the beginning of Section 3.9.3 (pp. 3.9-16). RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-4 The commenter suggests the Draft EIR does not specifically analyze the project's impact on groundwater supply or the potential groundwater discharge to streams as a result of increased pumping and that a thorough analysis of these water resources are necessary to determine the potential for impacts and the appropriate mitigation, if warranted. Implementing the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan does not require, nor is the City proposing, an increase in groundwater pumping. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact to groundwater supply, groundwater levels, or a reduction in groundwater discharge to streams in the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed as a result of the proposed plan. As described in Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, pp. 5-15, the City manages its groundwater supply in accordance with its 2004 Water Policy Resolution, which limits groundwater pumping to 2,577 AFY. CentralRohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-6 Final EIR, Responseto Comments The City will maintain this maximum pumping limit and groundwater pumping will not increase as a result of the PDA Plan. The 2004 City-wide Water Supply Assessment, which is areference for the EIR, provides the technical support for this maximum pumping rate. The City continues to monitor and document its groundwater use through its required Urban Water Management Plans and through cooperative participation in the regional groundwater management work occurring in the Santa Rosa Plain basin. Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, "Water Supply," pp. 5-15 provides a discussion of potential impacts of the proposed plan on water supply. This includes a discussion of potential impacts to groundwater levels from operation of the plan. Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, "Water Supply," pp. 5-15 also provides a summary of the water supply assessment (WSA) that was prepared by the City for the proposed plan as required by State law. The WSA is included as Draft EIR Appendix F. The WSA describes the water demand associated with build -out of the plan area as well as the three water sources used by the City, which includes groundwater pumping from the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of the Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin. The City is aware of the results of the Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, having participated as a cooperative funder of this study. The study documents the rising groundwater levels in the southeast portion of the Santa Rosa Plain groundwater basin as a result of the groundwater management policy included in the City's 2004 Water Policy Resolution. In addition to providing data and funding for the Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, the City provided data and funding for Groundwater Management Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain basin and is contributing to the implementation of this plan as well as the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan, required by the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014. This extensive body of technical and policy work documents that sustainable groundwater use is achieved through cooperative efforts throughout the basin and are not isolated studies associated with individual project(s) or plans. In addition to implementing its Water Policy Resolution, the City will continue to participate in the implementation of regional groundwater management activities to support sustainable use of groundwater in the basin. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-7 COMMENT LETTER 2 — CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE OF CAL[FORN1A—CA LLTORM.3TAII WO EjX1JLNCY— DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 4 P.O. BOX 23660 OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 PHONE (510) 286-5528 FAX (510) 286-5559 11'Y 711 www.dot.ca.gov February 1, 2016 Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger City of Rohnert Park Planning Department 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Serious Drop& Help saw water! SON 1011921 SON -101 -VAR SCH # 2015102081 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan — Draft Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Beiswenger: Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan. Caltrans' new mission, vision, and goals signal a modernization of our approach to California's transportation system, in which we seek to reduce statewide vehicle -miles -traveled 2-1 (VMT) and increase non -auto modes of active transportation. Our comments seek to promote the State's smart mobility goals and are based on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. Additional comments may be forthcoming pending final review. Project Understanding The proposed project is a programmatic land use master plan that is intended to support transit - oriented and infill development nearby the Rohnert Park City. Center and planned Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) commuter rail station. The proposed developments would cover a 330 -acre area centered on the Rohnert Park Expressway/State Farm Drive intersection, which would allow the construction of 835 multi -family residential units and 823,000 square feet (sf) of 2-2 retail/commercial, office, light industrial, and public/institutional use. Additionally, the project would construct new roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements in order to provide non -vehicular community access to the planned SMART station. The proposed project would add 27,777 new daily trips of which 1,352 trips would occur during the AM peak hour and 1,973 trips during the PM peak hour. The western edge of the PDA is bound by U.S. 101, which would provide regional access to the PDA. Lead Agency As the lead agency, the City of Rohnert Park is responsible for all project mitigation, including T 2-3 "Provide a soft, sustainable, integrated and efflcient transportation solem to enhance Calljornia'seconamyand livability" Central Rohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-8 Final EIR, Response to Comments Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rohnert Park February 1, 2016 Page 2 any needed improvements to State highways. The project's fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed cont. for all proposed mitigation measures. Additionally, please provide Caltrans with all future project- 2-3 specific documents and analysis that may derive from the proposed land use master pian. Regional Impact Fees U.S. 101 is critical to regional and interregional traffic in the San Francisco Bay region. It is vital to commuting, freight, and recreational traffic and is one of the most congested regional freeway facilities. Given the scale of the proposed project, the traffic generated will have significant regional impact to the already congested U.S. 101. The Department encourages the City to develop a regional transportation fee program to mitigate and plan for the impact of future growth on the regional transportation system. The fees would be used to help fund regional transportation programs that add capacity increasing improvements to the transportation system 2-4 to lessen future traffic congestion. Reducing delays on State facilities will not only benefit the region, but also reduce any queuing on local roadways caused by highway congestion. The purpose of regional impact fee program would improve mobility by reducing time delays and maintaining reliability on major roadways throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Bicycle and Pedc.vtriwy Improvements ■ We recommend that the City consider the use of on -street parking to create a parking - protected Class IV separated bikeway. Guidance on these facilities may be gained via Caltrans Class IV Bikeway Guidance (Separated Bikeways/Cycle Tracks), which can be 2-5 found at the following link: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/dib/dib89.pdf. Where protected bike lanes are referenced, please also include the Class IV designation; • Please clarify the meaning of `enhanced bike lanes' when referenced in the Bike and I Pedestrian Improvements section (p. 2-22) of the environmental document (e.g. Class II 2-6 buffered bike lanes with green pavement markings at conflict zones); • Where midblock pedestrian crossings are proposed, also consider rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) in addition to standard signals or High -Intensity Activated 2-7 Crosswalk beacons (HAWK), which Caltrans refers to as pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHS); and • On page 2-22, please correct all references to Professional Drive to Professional Center I Drive and Lynne Conde Drive•to Lynne Conde Way. 1 2-a Vehicle Trip Reduction The project should adopt a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program in order to encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use while reducing traffic impacts on State highways. The region should be supported by a framework of transportation alternatives by increasing transit, 2-9 pedestrian, and bicycle systems in order to maximize access and, mobility throughout the region while reducing dependence upon the automobile. In an effort to accomplish such, the project "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-9 Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rohnert Park February 1, 2016 Page 3 should consider the various TDM measures listed below. The TDM program should document vehicle trip reduction, including annual monitoring reports to demonstrate the ongoing reduction of vehicle trips while continuing to survey the travel patterns of residents and employees within the project area. • Project design to encourage walking, bicycling, and convenient transit access; cont • Parking cash out/parking pricing; 2-9 • Formation of a Transportation Management .Association (TMA.) in partnership with other developments in the area; • Adoption of an aggressive trip reduction target with Lead Agency monitoring and enforcement; and • Transit fare incentives such as such as subsidized transit passes on a continuing basis. Implementing various TDM measures will help the project become more consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy goals. Please also refer to "Reforming Parking Policies to Support Smart 2-10 Growth," a MTC study fimded by Caltrans, for sample parking ratios and strategies that support compact growth. Reducing parking supply can encourage alternate forms of transportation, reduce regional vehicle miles traveled, and lessen future impacts. Encroachment Permit Please be advised that any work or traffic control that encroaches onto the State ROW requires an encroachment permit that is issued by Caltrans. To apply, a completed encroachment permit application, environmental documentation, and five (5) sets of plans clearly indicating State ROW must be submitted to the following address: David Salladay, District Office Chief, Office of 2-11 Permits, California Department of Transportation, District 4, P.Q. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623-0660. Traffic -related mitigation measures should be incorporated into the construction plans prior to the encroachment permit process. See the website linked below for more information: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/`developsery/permits. "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and egicient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" CentralRohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-10 Final EK Response to Comments Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rohnert Park February. 1, 2016 Page 4 Should you have any questions regarding this letter or require additional inforni.4aii.on, please contact Cole Iwamasa at (510) 286-5534 or cole.iwamasa@dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, PATRICIA MAURICE District Branch Chief Local Development - Intergovernmental Review Cc: State Clearinghouse "Provide a sgfe, sustainable, Integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EM?,, Response to Comments 2-11 RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-1 The commenter thanks the City for being included in the environmental review process for the PDA Plan and expresses that the comments in the letterseek to promote the State's new mission, vision, and smart mobility goals. The City acknowledges Caltrans' mission to reduce statewide vehicle miles traveled and increase non -vehicular modes of active transportation and has similar goals and policies in its planning documents. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-2 The commenter summarizes the proposed plan including associated trip generation characteristics. The Draft EIR provides a comprehensive description of the proposed plan in Chapter 2 of the DEIR. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-3 The commenter states that the project's fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities should be discussed in all proposed mitigation measures and that all future project specific documents and analysis, derived from the proposed plan, should be provided to Caltrans for review. As shown in Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-16 through 3.9-22, the Draft EIR concludes that the proposed plan would result in less -than -significant transportation and traffic impacts, with the exception of significant impacts to three segments of U.S. 101. However, the Draft EIR does not identify any feasible mitigation measures for these three segments, as widening the freeway to accommodate additional lanes would result in substantial environmental, social, and financial impacts. As discussed in Response to Comment 1-2, the City of Rohnert Park recognizes that development within the plan area may contribute to these impacts to the regional transportation system, and the City has agreed to take the lead on preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan and impact fee structure that will require all future development in Sonoma County, including future development within the plan area, to make a fair -share contribution toward funding regional roadway improvements. The City will provide notification of future actions related to the proposed plan to Caltrans and will circulate these responses to comments to each organization and individual that commented on the Draft EIR. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-4 The commenter encourages the City to develop a transportation fee program to mitigate andplan for the impact of future growth on the regional transportation system. As described in Response to Comment 1-2, the City has agreed to take the lead, in 2016, on preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements that, once adopted, will require future development in the plan area to contribute towards funding regional roadway improvements. Central Rohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-12 Final EIR, Responseto Convnents RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-5 The commenter recommends the City consider use of on -street parking to create a parking protected Class IV separated parkway. Parking -protected bike lanes are encouraged within the proposed plan and are suggested specifically along portions of various local roadways such as State Farm Drive, as reflected in the street section concepts provided in Chapter 5 of the proposed plan. Additional street segments, with on -street bike lanes, could also be considered as a "parking -protected" solution at a later time, once proposed roadway improvements enter the detailed design phase. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-6 The commenter asks for clarification on the meaning of "enhanced bike lanes" referenced in the project description. References to enhanced bike lanes on Draft EIR pp. 2-22 of the project description are intended to support a variety of bike lane treatments, including green -striping or high-contrast bike lanes, separated bike lanes (through various methods), or other bike lane improvements that enhance driver awareness and increase the safety of bicycling. Since this is a programmatic -level EIR, more specific details regarding the type of enhancement or improvements will be determined as future projects within the plan area are designed and implemented. A definition for enhanced bike lanes, as described above, has been added as a footnote to Chapter 3, Revisions to Draft EIR, to update Section 2.3.4, "Bike and Pedestrian Improvements." RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-7 The commenter suggests that where midblock pedestrian crossings are proposed, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) be considered, in addition to standard signal or High -Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK) beacons. The City acknowledges this comment. Where references are made to HAWK signals in the Project Description of the Draft EIR, rectangular rapid flashing beacons will also be provided as a potential alternative solution to ensure the safety of midblock pedestrian crossings. The description of mid -block pedestrian crossings along Rohnert Park Expressway in the Draft EIR, pp. 2-22, bullet point b7 in Section 2.3, `Bike and Pedestrian Improvements," has been updated by Chapter 3 of the Final EIR to not only include pedestrian refuges and the option for high-intensity activated crosswalk beacons, but also rectangular rapid flashing beacons or other potential signalized crossing solutions. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-8 The commenter identifies that references to Professional Drive be updated to Professional Center Drive and Lynne Conde Drive to Lynne Conde Way. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comaients 2-13 References to Professional Center Drive and Lynne Conde Way have been updated throughout the EIR and proposed plan. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-9 The commenter encourages the Plan to adopt a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that supports transportation alternatives that increase transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems to maximize mobility and access in the region while reducing the dependence upon the automobile. City General Plan Goals TR -I, TR -K, TR -L, and TR -R and Policies TR -24 -TR -34, TR -41, and TR-42support reducing traffic congestion by encouraging transportation demand management (TDM) programs forbusinesses and workplaces and parking standards that help reduce automobile trips, and promote alternative transportation modes. These goals and policies are also identified as one of the objectives of the proposed plan. As a priority development area located adjacent to the future SMART commuter rail line and multi -use path, the proposed plan incorporates measures to reduce VMT and support transportation alternatives, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems that maximize mobility within the plan area and connections to local and planned regional bike and transit systems. City General Plan goals and policies as well as proposed plan circulation goals and policies (provided in Chapter 5.2 of the proposed plan) support the goals and strategies of, and function fundamentally similar to, the TDM program suggested by the comment. Rohnert Park General Plan Policy TR -22 encourages the adoption of a non -mandatory employer -based TDM program for Rohnert Park businesses. The City also has a trip reduction ordinance requirement, Code Section 10.80.040, that applies to employers with more than 100 employees. Development within the plan area would be subject to these various goals, policies, and requirements, as well as the goals and policies explicitly identified in the proposed plan. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-10 The commenter provides additional examples of TDM measures to help the project be consistent with MTC's Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Community Strategy goals and makes reference to the "Reforming Parking Policies to Support Smart Growth, " study, prepared by MTC, forparking ratios and strategies that support compact growth. The proposed plan incorporates input from a shared parking analysis study, prepared for the plan area in the Parking Policy and Management Strategy Memo (available upon request), focused on the Station Center and City Center subareas, where the potential for shared parking lots and future parking structures are envisioned, in close proximity to the SMART rail station. The results of the shared parking analysis are described in the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Section 5.7.2, "Parking Analysis." In addition to other parking reductions permitted by Chapter 17.16.040 of the City's Zoning Code, input from findings in this analysis have been accounted for in the parking ratios for the proposed plan, which propose parking reductions for multifamily residential development and retail, office, and public uses in the Station Center and City Center subareas. The proposed plan allows these parking reductions, encourages projects in the plan area to adopt a "park once" strategy (PDA Plan Policy C-5.5), where applicable, and builds in flexibility for development to meet City parking demands through various parking strategies, including shared parking, development of parking districts (in the Downtown); off-site parking; and CentralRohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-14 Final EIR, Response to Comments unbundled and paid parking, as future long-term strategies when parking demand warrants. Car share and bike share programs in the plan area are also encouraged. To provide additional clarification within the Project Description, Draft EIR Section 2.3.5, "Parking" has been revised as part of the Final EIR (see Final EIR Chapter 3) to provide additional information and reference to the assumptions behind the parking standards, including parking reductions considered and currently permitted by the City's Zoning Code that are also applicable to the plan area. This clarification does not change impact analyses or conclusions. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-11 The commenter advises any work or traffic control that encroaches into the State right-of-way requires an encroachment permit, issued by Caltrans, and provides instructions for submitting an encroachment permit application. The City acknowledges this comment and will coordinate with Caltrans on any requests for encroachment permits into any State right-of-way. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-15 TABLE OF CONTENTS ---For dccuMenf production use only --- Section 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS...................................................................... 2-1 2.1 List of Commenters on the Draft EIR..................... ............................................. __............ 2-1 2.2 Comments and Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR...................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments.................................................................... 2-1 Exhibits/Flgures No table of contents entries found. Tables Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR...................................................................... 2-1 CentralRohnertParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-16 Final EK Response to Comments 3.0 REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR This chapter presents minor text additions and revisions to the Draft EIR that do not constitute significant new information or changes to significance findings. Thus, in accordance with CEQAGuidehnes Section 15088.5, there is no need to recirculate portions or all of the Draft EIR. The changes are presented in the order in which they appear in the Draft EIR and are identified by page number. Text deletions are shown in strikeout (seettt) and additions are shown in underline (underline . Global Changes References to "Professional Drive" have been changed to "Professional Center Drive" and references to "Lynne Conde Drive" have been changed to "Lynne Conde Way" throughout the EIR and proposed plan. Chapter 2.0, "Project Description" Page 2-22, Section 2.3.4, Bike and Pedestrian Improvement Bullet Point b7). The description of midblock pedestrian crossings along Rohnert Park Expressway has been updated, as provided below, so that it not only includes pedestrian refuges and the option for high- intensity activated crosswalk beacons, but also rectangular rapid flashing beacons. b7) Upgrading RPX. to incorporate high-contrast bike lanes; widening the existing meandering sidewalks on both sides of the street, to support development of a Class I MUP; and supporting intersection and mid -block pedestrian crossings, with pedestrian refuges and high-intensity activated crosswalk signals rectangular rapid flashing beacons or other potential signalized crossing solutions at Lynne Conde Way and along the SMART MUP. Footnote 1. Footnote 1 has been added, as provided below to clarify the definition of an enhanced bike lane, as used in the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan and DEIR. Enhanced bike lanes as referenced in the proposed plan and this 1' final EIR, encompass a variety of bike lane treatments including green striping or high-contrast bike lanes, separated or protected bike lanes ( e. g__parking-protected bice lanes), or other bike lane improvements that enhance driver awareness and increase the Safety and comfort of bicycling. Page 2-23, Section 2.3.5, Parking. Additional clarification provided on assumptions. to and proposed parking standards. The proposed plan identifies the appropriate number of off-street parking spaces for new residential, mixed-use, light industrial, retail/service, and office uses, as shown by the parking ratios in Table 2-4. These standards reflect parking analysis findings conducted for the proposed plan, including a shared parking; analysis and parking reductions in the City Center and Station Center subareas, as described in Section 5.7.2 of the PDAPlan. For nonresidential uses, on -street parking spaces would be permitted to meet the requirement for off-street parking spaces. Chapter 17.16.040 of the City Zoning Conde also allows parking reductions, including: l) up to 25 percent for shared parking, where a combination onuses can demonstrate and make the finding that the uses share a. common parking area and demand for parkin Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 3-1 Occurs over different time periods, making the full narking requirement unnecessary; 2) up to 10 percent for providing a ddeshare, transit incentive or other transportation system manaRement prog1mi and 3) gerrnits mectins parking demand off-site for off-site uses within 3(10 feet of the use(s) they are intended to Serve. CentralRohnert ParkPriority DevelopmentArea Plan 3-2 Final IHt Responseto Corninents EXHIBIT B MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM entral ` ohnert ark Priority Development Area Plan Y City of Rohnert Park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program SCH # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: AECOM February 2016 S THERE IS A TRW.WN V SCTA s T City of Rohnert Park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program SCH # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: G�4•T.,l February 2016 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM INTRODUCTION Where a CEQA document has identified significant environmental effects, Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires adoption of a "reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of a project approval to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment." This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to provide for the monitoring of mitigation measures required for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan, as set forth in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). The City of Rohnert Park (City) is the Lead Agency that must adopt the MMRP for development and operation of the plan. This report will be kept on file with the City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928. The CEQA Statutes and Guidelines provide direction for clarifying and managing the complex relationships between a Lead Agency and other agencies with implementing and monitoring mitigation measures. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097(d), "each agency has the discretion to choose its own approach to monitoring or reporting; and each agency has its own special expertise." This discretion will be exercised by implementing agencies at the time they undertake any of portion of the project, as identified in the EIR. PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The intent of the MMRP is to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of adopted mitigation measures. Additionally, for the purposes of public disclosure and to assist in monitoring compliance, the MMRP identifies actions necessary to comply with relevant regulatory requirements discussed in the EIR. The MMRP is intended to be used by City staff and others responsible for project implementation. A lead agency may rely on compliance with applicable laws and regulations in determining that a proposed project will result in a less than significant impact. (See San Francisco Tomorrow v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 229 Cal.AppAth 49, 525 [holding the city properly relied on compliance with building codes and related regulations in determining the proposed project would not result in potential safety hazards].) As a standard condition of approval, the City requires applicants comply with federal and state laws and regulations as well as standard City requirements that are applicable to a proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091, subdivision (d), the mitigation monitoring and reporting program should identify both mitigation measures as well as "condition[s] of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects." For this reason, in addition to identifying mitigation measures contained in the FEIR, this MMRP also contains relevant regulatory requirements that, as discussed in the FEIR, make up part of the basis for concluding one or more impacts identified in the FEIR are less than significant. As set forth below, the City will monitor compliance with these applicable laws and regulations in the same manner as for the mitigation measures set forth in the FEIR. The timing of implementation, the party/ies responsible for monitoring and enforcement, and a column to confirm implementation of the mitigation measures/standards/regulatory requirements is also included in Table 1, below. Mitigation measures are numbered in the same way they are numbered in the EIR. Existing regulations/standards are numbered according to the order in which they are referenced in each EIR section (often times existing Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-1 regulations apply to various impacts). The timing is the point(s) at which the mitigation measure/standard/regulatory requirement must be monitored for compliance. In many cases, the first step in compliance will be to initiate compliance with the subject mitigation measure/standard/regulatory requirement. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The project applicant is responsible for fully understanding and effectively implementing the mitigation measures/standards/regulatory requirements contained within the MMRP, as directed by the City. The City is responsible for overall administration/enforcement of the MMRP. CHANGES TO MMRP Any substantive change in the MMRP shall be reported in writing. Modifications to the requirements of the MMRP may be made by the City subject to one of the following findings, documented by evidence included in the public record: The requirement included in the FEIR and the MMRP is no longer required because the significant environmental impact identified in the FEIR has been found not to exist, or to occur at a level which makes the impact less than significant as a result of changes in the project, changes in environmental conditions, or other factors. OR, • The modified or substitute mitigation measure provides a level of environmental protection equal to, or greater than that afforded by the mitigation measure included in the FEIR and the MMRP; and The modified or substitute mitigation measure or measures do not have significant adverse effects on the environment in addition to, or greater than those which were considered by the responsible hearing bodies in their decisions on the FEIR and the proposed project; and, • The modified or substitute mitigation measures are feasible, and the City or, where applicable, other public agencies, through measures included in the MMRP or applicable regulations, can ensure implementation. Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving modifications to mitigation measures, including a determination whether further environmental review is required, shall be maintained in the project file with this MMRP and shall be made available to the public upon request. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program PO A � 0 U b -- aoi a `~ o ai n a 60 0 bU o '" .. U a� a) � `o b bo a ° u b y 1�yy Cc O ,ba ai 0I°'a,��o" Q O O N ° oU y0 U Ut''. a) y _ oci O O O p O bq b p 0 O C O cd ayb� C." N ^O 'b >3 0 cH bb bD Q 'O � � �° ° ,� a) r ' ti 4.cd M O o cod a ai ,b Q m cd cd6 "Ny " y � O U N O U N �" ^.. a) 3 t TJ ° Q U y D 0PqyU ¢, cd cd Q ani Obb C, ^C a) vas, . o. a) w 4 UU - Oa). PO cl .. Co .." y ,>, O 6 r. a UO cd •rrc"d ¢¢ �a) N¢ Ncdi Q .O >U �s.. ti Y cd a) O U vl U . o a) .� M '+ ° o .ao) •y+- a) a)cd cy �• O f. a) m c j bA a) ° 'b O b y d cd N��fnbbyN sw: cUd 4 � icey. p p U ab a 114 d m Cd 55 U N A- 4,�.c 4. 0 •a00~. 'C N C b)O}Q p b 4.°. N O,tocd cd 00 cd cd a C ami ' ocd � + 0O y °3 C) cd �bn p A b d� o 0 o x ��' �.'a p, o 3>a°)cd i a ca 0 M • U M • v; f� -0 cUC U v • • • • • Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-3 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program a a A q 0 U ^o _ abi CO 4) 0 a ' U s. v 0w o ° > ani '" y > rxQ�aQ 00V�aQ 0 on o tw °q U .� ~O G O� aha aha a� to C3 cc cd r.cn cd o 0onco cd °' b cd o w o MM . c o cnv c° P U ° ° 4. A4. O . O �+ c� bb a • O a M ° v> o o °.3 o �, ►, a o o to • ° .0 .r a U i~ o 3 ' �, o a— o U o v :� b� y 9 G cd ° s... m U �+ a0. b cd cd y b O O Ocd N O 0 �' + p U 0 0 cd U .�+ QO cd .�'w p cid O .� UWk N U • �N� r •v •R�•�r y t bj v, aO 0—c °°0m0i"d ,y '+" b o U N x cd v° b ° � = 0 : W N acO o w � y .12 V O 'rte �p O O Uca ¢ y� cd0 P- cd0O"'PU" rn- °�U ck� U � o cd IW 0 . o U�•— U cd U] y (A t O 4? O0 = .O O LW a O ' ' N v � ' cd by W ¢� U C U U Q+ N " 4. O .O a rnn •m CgA PQ L: "" PdV y O cd 0 "0 cn aA N � b'�_ en .. +x �cd " �•.. �� , c oo o b y P,n w o. 3a "d .d u, �...cc +�a� c 15 Z ��o ..0 cdaboO ,, P, a b n 0 0 °>'°' 4 i �; • ,. L." N cd QQ " y .n y a fn fir" 1y cd O Q m cd a ' rA 0 cd ' O O� W m co U y i.l Cd CC Q) -6 O U �O ^ C•�d .� ,� Hca' �. cd �1 t o C a p 0 a, o° P. v o p, �y a� 'm y i O 6 O QA cd 0 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MIVIRP-5 � a i a A � 0 U PO • ~ U •pw _O �In W rs! A �oy bo 0 on 00 O 0 U a�a U bo cd 0 moo w° •O c p, o bn �b CC Pa'^ c}d.� O �y" cd U C." p O b i I..w a, O O O 0 ' o O N" a� C% , " 0 N r.•� rn � .s 0 p bU O 4. .+ bq VJ y y Q O y 0 cd N om• p U ^^ cj N bA cd O •0 x PC .0 0 U r. O U p" O G U U N f� Q CAy N. 0' mac. y, o V 0 0 .d F, y p 9 �+ w � 0 cd �. �. N 0 U o VJU .14 0 00 0 O. U N '. V .d bk 0 N O.+ O 5z � d Q 0 cd d U0 •�CcO w 'tr, � V�p ,--� �O .y ¢� Z 0 0 b 0, U i; 0i H . ¢+ w `+� 0 � cqd � o � o cdcd as C 0 O , u 0 � 00 0 0 0 b o ~boy O O Vi O bQ W F. y U O U �O O O y G� y yn /y1 U yby eC°io y A' in i ami � a c�i io .r PCq o �ai o �� D i uX 2 5maid > oo C > rV "d O cU.d .r M O es b�Id Qi V L-.yt .-+ Q. >0 wr v� it cd • Om 0 to Q. O cu O cd —� 0 cd p �� iNC y a -0 cd V � a �� d ° ¢ �0 ° ;a ca cd � o o •� a) cd — Q � �.� as Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MIVIRP-5 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program cr A � 0 U b � � b w aai W Q b0 F cd cd s. 42 o y O GD tL g po 0 0 a) 49 q 0 o v� p U cd GL �"� at C: cd O 0 L7 0L. cid O r� O +� cd N a) p U O 30 top v++ a) m p p bq C"j p b +s� p cdcn U pbo 7 c d ), �, o '5, '- r —O C'a) p j o c fl t1, cd .- � ) UUpc 40.0 U2 75 ° y+ ~ cd cd y ° Iirsi a �6 � a ay k � 'd ° oo a cd ) o o a; 0 ) Up ) c vC0�O). � ti q 4. iU Uo Ej �++cd aCv), " U U y O 2> '0 UO bpUc� 'b 3 b�v° O ) cd '7 am bv , Q+cd — 0 � b o 'C bb •d O O 'O cd cd l O a 3 ) 5 m o O o N p= �v O -a o) ) °O c o y ' cc °o a) �y ,� o cd o o, 3 . o a� a) p 'C W '� O N `n N O O cb i•y • p >~ Oj rte+ • rn cd O ��" U U e) C41 U o }a) GIS Cd Y b a) N Cd � 0 Q� � � ,.� � ,�I iy � V7 P4� p coO � � � rl Cd �'23 cd ,...y N 4!] van) a) ,� A O d '" a) O C=, N a) � •�'+ cd ,s" V70 •--� cd '" cd O cd m p cd - v, �, N v cn > cd F� �, m d 3 v) a~ .� a) v o ° n e) E fa E %a if . . . Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program PO as a� ea A Q 0 U �o. gyp, 0 0 > 0 on o 0 �U 0 o� o ob r. a " C7 7 a V b a o o o o o 04 y �� o b ^�bo o o 0 9 o o U '� o � -0 A .ti a iQ o� o°p,�, 0 O' 0 o o �A cd 0 cy cd �d a a °a c0 o GU a p. ani .� c°i O 0 w Ku3 a� O 0, Ncd � o o .., p .0 O O k �+ y 0 o N p Maio b .v N ,s a�Go 0_0 y U aH� pp� 3� �o 0 q cd H � R' Q, J. o, c a v ¢ �n . a c°i p, Q, o cp " o a° v'^ 0 3 b° v d �, o b b on 3 ... O cd-0, O to 0.� Aar cdU. 0 y Q 'cd, oN ' �� ° �o0 o, � 0Vj b M V t, U U V N O , cd N O b Hwy .4 MM� N 'A .-ti •� b `d 2 °•..O n �,� 0— 0> o 0 ° dy vO o�, o •o �'' 0 o 0 � cd � a" b y V N cd y UOPS 0 0 U sa,y 0 ° O '-1 F i•, F, •--� gip" CA °,' y 0 te a.- t `d��°c-,1 0tl qO N � o abi y .� o .� ,� r-Icn � U ,s o o A * p a� • ON . •� /M� p �i . �, U � "d a� cn '3 �, 5 N 0 y0 p Cd �' =�, o 0 o •� u p. o o (1) Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-7 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program u � as A � 0 U b oA °' b ov CO bvi aoi vi cH cd U �Qa0 cn �ACOD x0 o cn o CW °A o onch A o� a, ° Y 10 o as$ ° 110 o o;c U oc U O b u bl) cd ' a 0 cd 'd V b 0A o cd cc N O :G U Ub � P o cd i o o ° qn 4" °A o F � �E" �A ��° a x ° t° 10 o co, aUD 0 O b0 U ycc C % N,� b a� y U N C U U V] OIn =11 M�M IH W 1•. �� y �.V/y] _cd ��/� F�� may/ . • y QI W V W W U �I°-I Qy M� . �+ F�-1 W �'-i cd O � C"" E d G N p — ° .� 4 b W s..,0 N 0 a��, �� °'a° v w � �v� a a�u>~� ° �Q �1--4 W cd b O O C/ r rU O A b .0.� Uac ocd U� nvab¢' �O. .Fs~ y ct V0 O N y U � F. U �v, � cd 04;M0 b �, .� a F. Q O U cd - b u O M +r 0 O d a y d= o y •v c� y 2 s 20 4-, �y ab s "'~ rA C� Nd o d W "' N " U N b � rA d U -dU o a �; as �b ^".. N y. QFcd C)C" 9b �. . O �; M R p aui O s°. Ad¢' A o o 0� P� o� u� r.¢, ani y 4" o Q A p A d c, c a u 4� �, M o u u bn o y;cy ° vi ami+ oab o •y� O as ° �, .?; .'~ a U v �b ° p o u �•�w cd o 0 d a° a x0.14...2 �"WU a o o d. .�C7�'r o U � 9w Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-9 d a � a A � 0 U .b -d �r .O pa. �A b po �W Ar�aA aft Qa;aQ to 0 0o N a 'd O CU o A o U _ to cd 44-4¢ A cd cd ~ o� ao V 1 obyb 5 W a M -S Ci"'iC Q a� = o a�cc �o " •+~+ U a cd '� rt ~ U 1 .d U cC N O Q' U 0 a� a� cn eo �b ' 3 b cd cd 0 U~ y U .d .b c w w 3 'O N x° cd a N w O Q �C a U Q 0 40. p v'4= Uco N N ° b y �" a 'o o 0 a .b y °� °¢ p m b o C4 t4 o ¢ 0 tp •b b. cd a 0 a°�' o c? vUi �c-ba N '¢ .r' -¢I IM1 CdCd (n ^l O cd 0 �by ro). % i - ti y N i.r O cdcd ° N ' OU�.N 0� � 0R�MO" 'd>1 cn ' 1 ,UV�J' r bN Z0 y• � ChV � �U C n0> 40Uo L. U V A0 , �cbo v •�i°cd W �O0.. " .-ovp0 4~ ° �'~p n�` C's b o •,��d+ cd crA o �o + U VQ wo0 Ues b•" sSU3; a�o >1 C+-4 C U 0 01-4o . b�°�>", o M ° cd d ~� U 4- 0 J4. % y/CQ0, � •� wr~/"j �, y, V W �V 0 O 05a � > i b OU0, oiv.\� o ° v� cd cd N GM w a� as Mo a �o a o b o b �' ani H aMi v Q. '0 o 0 'd '" ° 0, cz � • O "� "d y •�. y N ,.:=� bo y U vyi ¢ • °^ 0 W4 N vi N ,s" N 'd ' a cd W Cd cJ+ CC U it c" b Cd U x U ¢, o 4-4 S Ovy� p. N O. �-I O N ° O C�"L N� O aN -cc F:cd o �' w o. r� R1 ' o a Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-9 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program a� a as A � 0 U % ++ w txAcnaA 0 on b O � cd O o c' U r��r% y U y bo c0 O Oma' «3 ¢ 0 w u ' 0. o> a ;b a 0 to bo O C0 0 b� N O� .O °� a, caa a �� a b 0 «i to ! � cd sa, U cd �7 X20 b Y °p, O �+ a 'Sy U �, w C� .� y a rA �r H •--9b 0 p6i "� c0 3 cd cd vcd VI a ,00 O 30, bao. o a�o 0 n6� 0 O y�° 0 •ca, 0O AN ; b� E +o ►. 9a0; °Q� �a�� 0c�o 4b°> a y 0 o .O N 80 � W a 'ILA)IOU� �, U •Qto u C �� O .'~ y O cid c°- a 0 cd .o ° cn Ow . -d OQ .� a� ' A. i b4 a a ,��0 cd3 � ani ° a, b o tyU o ° CA b4 b �a °�,' o ca �, c Q ° G 0 a� ° M . 0 a 0 0 Sb cd ro, o rn 0, °°b ' 60 b on b C', , a O m �c wi o� ' A � bx o � o�A ° ba �`� l aii ea au 0 UIP cy � a° ai 3 b c�O o�sa's"i. 74 .. w a� cd ° o s3 U4 w> 0 a° 0 En cd C3 rcd,a1 o a3 3a1 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-11 w Q 0 a A 0 U •o a .� 0.- 0 wQ Q �W 0 to o 0 �' bA o U b U o+ o aha P-4 A4 'y Cd b cd to' ,U� .li • ca cd M.y o cd y�w �0�'64 w 1.•I y^y d 0 • bo�i h 'ry `)QM I� `" ° o °'° I1 On '- a ° �° 0 4-4 °O3°p�a�„a�.dpO�°a�i��b� o a o ° o �� eet o cd U U U •>y �" ° o y a`oi �30.0 ' U cd �y rbb �i••,yI 00 Oj � O '� y�iy" y�- 0Cl U� wCd •° bQ% r'brI~•1 /•.•y Y 0 �.� ` rry`y�;�yj! �}y+i.yl N 0 di oj -0 Q 0 o oo o o rA ¢ U U cd 4� !� i 0.o a Lt, .. C o v� U U C .fl M cd U O 0 4-. b CA v, U N 0 0 ¢, 0 r: bA a`�i v 0 110 '� ° cd >, a� as ' o ,J v °' a, tq ai �? 0 +�+ U Q 4: ?? v a, o" a "C � cd �• ° 0 C��. °ria G t� a R o o A •C Z b c°> y ) 0 U `� ^ 0rq r0n y y epa Vi U O N U ti r. by N t y 0 cd N o 0 r. > f 0 c7 y U 'r v� U y O 0 0 cd U 0 cd .0 cd .0 N cr b rti b �n 0r 0 'd N N C b C lc' -0 c U o O •ti,� ° ° U r; a ocd r , o y '� a H bz ¢ cd y U bn O N~ E p O C '�". L1 tiS 4] i0 .!. U m N V y cV r ° 40 N U .�"�' •� y w W m 0) y v M cdi 4-y y V1 V U, v0c ~Ucd yCd 0Qaa� a) cd 0 > cd o U0 yi� 'AyW b00 0 a0 .b .� W � .- " U cag 0 c� 2 >o O 0 ° 0 0 0 w Cd �rA �, d cd4 °s , Q° o . •o� aiYy �" 0 ti �as � 0c 0 cd O Nn � Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-11 d a� v � a A � 0 U ^o iw V N L b py v� p ami 0 on O .w 0 O a�aU > bn y °° cd " 4, a 1° ° ° ° V c' ti a� 4. ° 3 0 o v cl- '15' ¢ o n 0� 0 ao ban tea+, ° -0 ° ° o '�;�+ a' '�, rCr Qcd U p Urs O N O q �... cd U P.+�+"0 U 4.0 cid '. b y �+ U 'C N 'v bD+�� O N Z U Cc 01 bD 0 ¢, cd a�O +~1 N M . to Q '� O cd O l p U bA `n 4" N y � � � 0� U� N � . U E! � � � � o '�0 �0b�cd �x0 o y�s0 h y � "d M C� Q�... a �b i•� 0 'b��++ Cd iQi ecd •CSC .d 0 CO F+ . G ~i, •� yCcU -1��, N N '4 �Q" rte+ V1 y cd Q .'3 ed N = N p• N O F 0 Q OU -0'0 y N 6 w cn U Id > U NN w iO. O C C) v U00 a> UN N N S3. N .t 0 W 0 b UUCd �++ �+ c�j cd 0 I r +�� O — •� �.y / o s' o t O V] Cd id N a-+ �'•. `2s4 O ,(., '0'y d it � Wo r Q —,n� U O r R ¢°A ^NQ - P �r " y cd C p� 0 «U3 � � �' C � U O > N cd C � a� � Zi a N3 0'0 ' Gr O 4 � Q U O N Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-13 a� A � 0 U •o on a� A 0, 0 on J O o U aha o a� o bo, b '" ^d u o o 'd �n s� on o oV cd U 0 ¢' �' as 0 ti u 9 N a� ai y 0 rig U U � o � i �' on '� En ,j ... o ti •.. U �" y ►. 1-4 cd GO 0 o b o a� U y O N w ami V a� oo c's a� cd Zj 0 aUiCj •° o v� � °..' cd d 6 y 8 y a � 0�C ami cd o y v o� a� 4� U , & 0 0 U a> a� cd A y 0 4= U bQ c0 .�o " C� � cd 43 -60 .0 U U U cd •� _� U 0 4-.U O Cd 0 M cd•� co u 4.. , C� V] 4.4 cC Cd N vcn[ cc! 4, 0 y Y 0.o o "(4:4x d 0 o o 0 0 0 u y t9 9 q) y +7 b 9� C� U +� R 0 O asd r u- b) 9& Ao Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-13 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 0 U b cd 6D � v � o 40. W ao'A A ao'A�aA 0 bUo CWto a� :~ � ° o • � o bn c;j O 5 y O p 5 v� V m O O U aha o ;� U aha CO • ^•I V, o YQ �b w "04 }}qU U •. yV�.i'y4 �i�°r-'y1I rs�Vy1� (i/y] •O �ili~-I1 p^• ^0 A [[..QQvU O t4, + .+,.tiyy..� bFF�I I ig cd cd o'O ° q w 4 C) p G U Y rn 0 O O a w :0 U eke v �+ p > En bo b ami cd o0 v� o b �, vi AA1d� p, 2 '3 0 4y o b Ov 'w r.� &n P. cd N U id 4a U 40. ti.. U cd GL 'b sp. id 40r 4y 4w O LU. O OO tD C". U "O C �. V1 v, U P R3 bA 42 N 7 �+ +r v •� by p b �' b y y7ab Y U v}i o 5 a a+ .° �,, a 0 cd 3 0'� q 4) 'C U ?N o p P o O o c 0 y '0 = 4C cd NU P O Vl d 6� C� N Fi 0 '0 w > V O° i•+ y a o 5 ,��- CN U o U i -i Qu Cd a� •x a+ t~ y O cd O O 0 4° 0 3 b 40,Ccf V ° ^� — cd � cd. N a a as P; a bUa� •O O '" y m a� O vv, >, +-+ v, v 4P. +o GOO o c -d 1 O -0 c o c m U by cd �, N �+ Pa cd t., O ti "C 4� vi b EI O P. S. U .1 6) ;d N '—' '—' V O p x ao °x' a r b c', bcd �. p p � y y M M 5n ai ° o rte+ i°My' • Q 4� P U U N bD � 0 R •r+ vUi bb Cl N 4a O N 4. py '.. 0 �y' v �, �+ O ai 0 'b w p m O �, bo � ° a ai a s b o +. U r-+ Off• U .,•. 'C N •j"., O N N N "a Po .y •�+ U L." p pip cd b O S y cd U Pa CO N iSA �7 CS i t�j a v v N c [] .`n tri C4 IYy " y� c"n v0 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program b A � 0 U N U O bA U �3 [� 0 •� C". O off U cd U C M ^, 1-4 p >to U Ra o o �� p pqg V U cd�N to �,..' c-,, �-+ U . sN. C"r cd . • O 4� N "SL y .d Ucd bA b cd as "::I � � cd A -,S ;3 Ucl.A. ' � O �— 'C o 0U R ryC" b> o O a; 0 ,Ot 0 cdO app a: .0c" "OO L O > 'Z-- cd o Gn cUd 0d1 '�S��+ , g G um, �O6 y zcd o " C i 00 'd Q .�' r Op �., 00 cd b A o o o a� b o b i a� U v on g --i x cd uUi `n U P cd O O 3 N y0 cd O• .;5 5�. 0 b' N cc Q b cj ' E' Cf.++ . 0 U ~•C O N 0O cd c+� y O 'd -0 O 'y�'s0. 'd O >b p U O 0 O y 0x on 2 - cc woo, cd 0 v?�'' "aoi oo-4, 0 o � >,°' c°) �c� cd 0 o aiz��- `" y•5 U •C O :: �, v� Z O p �v�i � vpi O ..>. 0 � cd U ❑kn O o t� 0 �� o 0 p p cd 0 y �+ cd U V �'" cd cd Q. �" �r �r p v' y C cn [\ U N N ,Z 0 U U U yN. CO 'a •S 00 '0 '0w 4 ¢ U�t • �T-+i Ed � Oo � W �LU O ¢I U H cd -S .5 2 -0 iL Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-15 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A � 0 U b o b p o W bD F s. y 4 u b CL � o � � U � u, ............ A � p � a� p U C4 00 ; W 0p 3-d •� Z � p . 0 cq cd 0 o �" 9 y N bA — bA OV0x cc�r a'mor Ob C N p, U �boo V co -•i .x" cd cd yD O to 0.) N cd bA bb yam.. c U W- kn a'U O °�-' chi a)�" C,3 c��d o 0v cd •d o Q > n ani cd .o p Ocd `+ v `� C"b OE! Q Q ed ~ eu cd 'd U Lam' b p 'S U ani . G PI •� � G � s ,0 � b k � a Z a� p. cs to o °' ani O 0� Q, ° o U a a) 74 w o U U 0 '� ¢ O p U a) O cd cy O Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-17 A � 0 U � � aoi 0A � � � � o�io rg � • Y� u y N c40 _O U ° i��ad 01 A a;q �W Aa:a o an .d [� O�� o o p U aha 0. •R '� o a� w p ;FBI by O '" *U O O ,tial. .. O - U .-cd o•0N �o0(1) ��.bcd a " U '�O 40 cd •by fU .b LdSO °Qn �O -0 y, ti Cd N0•A M D 4� }'ro) u O 4� y bD Q 'd cN 0�/ 3 cu — a o � U � ° � (1) p cd d O�4)+ U y OL"i V V7 'd c� ° U �' ° c°i m avi 5 ed 50 -d • o �cd a U °1 U `� b °s,, a, ', ° O y0 a a oA ° a��i "0 EPU 0 0 °� N o � aoi .9� °�' bis ipd °*• b U� �v b'D w —p °G I 74 an Q O a N S3 45 V'O y ry) r. dU 'dcd V O- .O rU "_ac.-.�.iu}s �U*�y • U� � VGo bA � • ULl} r:�r U Ny N N s'C •..' 0 0 0 cbC.O.� cod U ,� � c77•�Vi [� •',JI bb 00D —0 CC U U Cd •� Ai i+ U cid 0O a° u bU c0 °°�0b a N �.� di ': N v°i W }err~ W w .u`"��'�� N p ¢� . y ;n 1:14 a. b vpi o a, � U � � • • • • • • cd m b � a tko 03 a er n . Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-17 Q1-0 A b 40. Wao'Q�aA a0'Av�a,A w b a rA 7: ri 1 4 5 cy 42 0 c, 0 CO >-, W bD o 'd `l o o °A 10 p i c v 0 ��.� �ao�b A 3 aiy'd y c° a V o ¢, ° c ^1d'b X w'b 0 4. 'B m U°A �d •° c U a P °BT W U30q (� > cc U O C7 V o at ° 3 y ani o 0 0 V Q .d O yy cUd *�_ O rA V it �� r + cd ¢ b cd 0 4° cd 4° C7 > 0 vl U > °� �°�' a� °' x i iO.i SO.i y Q cd cd k a y " A a N . + 'MA d •; ed >' U O 5,44 'r, a N p y 4a w A ° Pq . y ' 0 ° � � � 0 ,� � y ami 0 03 .o O .i:. U o d cd w Q" a O o U3 LP74 cd 4""4, o ami U ca .� �. cd04 .il a°' 0 0 a 3 W ai O A ° o iu VJ - r. ti A O a U cd° O M y o �j N V N CO �� ° oa°'bb ;:� 0 ° m C7 O= y ° 3 chi ° .° x=21 j ° y b o a 0 0 a o0 0ccd'. .= �yU cd 0 V cd O U C"r 0 0 U >, y 0 0 '" y rn cd M 0 �n iu �' a� �� ° ami i w~ •y � Vl � '� Cd cd 0 •� ... 4-+ yO� O b • 0 O v� F o O cd 4 N�� 4 r-+ > oW bo>>i 'n O "A 3 0 , o ^� °•o o w° a ani Cx7 0 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program W Q a� p M o %�y U Fr U y 9 b O C40 a, O U p �o-SU C', Cc '0 b >' 3 0 O o cd O c U bb a�cd W cC Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-19 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A � 0 U ti ti 4 ons aU a�� cj a� W aoL1�wA r�1°.aQ 0 on o on O A p F� O•pa o.�a o C6o a � a 0 cl bio1 o -S oo 0�4 �w A wc a c0x� ° cd� o 0 00 ' v� bb 40 10 f3i O y� G7 u� N -0 cd 0-2 ao W O V N "� 4 t4"�' ~ v 'in U tN .� o U o Ci c�Q G q 0.5 +� cn b .� 'v� 0�7 Cc `e pa 0 M U of 4� Ci 2 c [s9b [O] ' s 'd 0 sem. UO 0 O as F. O C". O S, 0 J; .fl O 'O U '� Gn C U ycd p cl y b ob C>� Cx ¢ OOM Z-, O4 �0)o VJ ° p by >b ,p 0�acd V j+ 6y 0 o W o ticoai C7 b� o ice' o • p p �, �? o o asx WD .� .� p as W d n 'clo � a� U � 3 � b " ° !cd « a b 0 O' P, 0 p api cd> o o x o a, U o U ca co 0 a� Z 3 �$ 0 M O y y o y —cd 9bF ri ° ^C N O ��+y ��+ c O O •r�"" •C ti �U � rN.I C �q y Cd •� U +O+ it it F .V • 0co � O ti N U VI 'J U 10+ y ° •�GA0 a 0 42 bn �cl r e � D• cd - d ' U0A 0R Q -5 - >---- I W) C P. ' n Q, E3 €4 0 U R; 0 0 4) CO Z Q Ej C) rix C� -0 . S Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-21 a� a as A 0 U b 40, `5 c a „ 0 bD rrrr A 0 E" ° o� U a�w O U rn 0 Lw rn y •S' W3> in 1 4 O O t 40, cd 0w N cd `�00 �° cd a, b 0 =I °y o 4� o b , ooO � y cd a o 0 a. 0� °�'�3�-°daw'° o ^d R, y p 0 0cd °? °O�++cd M cd y y cd y F�1 O a) F•i o � U O O 0 cd yp •.� by r�n •� Q te �b��.�! � rn •y� O� a) 1° p""ba *7 0 3 U cd •b . � �U o o��•�o� U�0 r2 cd 0 OR 0 N ° � b .14 b 0 - F! cc 0 cd �° ai 3 O U ++ ¢ pa .14 3 O a S" cd M bA .d m a) y • 0 cd� �, r% cd cu Cd vU� ld F -i 'O U 00 'rVJ U a) 0C +� � 1 o � r. O U cd Q � °U U y 0, 0 cd� bo ti Cid y`�� O b L! m C�. v U3cd y a) 0 O l+ 0 0 U U "� rn . y ° r-+ a) .y" V o m b cd y 0" `�-� U w e �b cd cd 0° -d cd W 3 M Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-21 b bo 0.0 y ani �W req A wq A U • ^ b � '� ° � cpi n • ° on y '� ..cc 0 0 42 0 rL CL U O Q to ° U 4. O + on 3 o a o° b aGi yG- 0 p" o b y c� ° v cd �° R -pn. , Cs, t_'7 v tw ca o ¢, 0 '0 q,oA i� >� 6 c°nw'Wc°�a�� ° o to 0'n cdCd GA E ` co O o 0e y: qNb) w U3 c U •2 04 cd 0 C a 0 0cUd U° a .� .N Q�•I 8 a a y to �p s a� >, ° 0 Y cd pp J'" ^C t� ° rn p" c�pd v p vi t'•' 40 N �"„ M O cc O p U H Pi b cd N 3 w + O U cd b U.N �, cd 0 A4 0 C4-4 0 G U C7 d U (n O U N FA F e o , o 5 A'G E7 `]a a 'C aai Uo c3n cud cul 0 W o S 4 cdco A .� b U OA bj% cC U M o U v° o o U aha; a�w U • ^ b � '� ° � cpi n • ° on y '� ..cc 0 0 42 0 rL CL U O Q to ° U 4. O + on 3 o a o° b aGi yG- 0 p" o b y c� ° v cd �° R -pn. , Cs, t_'7 v tw ca o ¢, 0 '0 q,oA i� >� 6 c°nw'Wc°�a�� ° o to 0'n cdCd GA E ` co O o 0e y: qNb) w U3 c U •2 04 cd 0 C a 0 0cUd U° a .� .N Q�•I 8 a a y to �p s a� >, ° 0 Y cd pp J'" ^C t� ° rn p" c�pd v p vi t'•' 40 N �"„ M O cc O p U H Pi b cd N 3 w + O U cd b U.N �, cd 0 A4 0 C4-4 0 G U C7 d U (n O U N FA F e o , o 5 A'G E7 `]a a 'C aai Uo c3n cud cul 0 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program W o S ' bU yy. Y O p co bj% cC 44' �"U O , >o v° cd U 0 � 0 07z W o U o o •o N cd cd PL4 ca Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program b A � 0 U b c > �`«. W O 0G7� tx Q A 0 bU to U O A .� PS b o o U aha a, `t > w bA� a> 42 amiA o a !�. 2 b a> eke o cd o �U o o'o cd N U Q w W Cd 4. ¢, -d ' n 'fid 4-i 0G cd p ¢, d 0 y y N 0 C 0 bA 0 b y r4 �" cd U a) d O 0 -0 b �� v� N 0 cd cd 0 041. o�� a ° W�� 0 a w 0 °cd o bA � � U a o > "bD W2 O 0 cd o 4 0 �W U > V N N o t. bAW d O o U + U ..Ny ••••� ��o: O cd 0 o a).-O O v °U>4 •:.+. .0-° b p. 0 P4 cd O� W a +b Wcev o o QM — o •� � � . a c! co U°� cd v . p dO U N' �b o v, N M Go, r,o oo V1 ti Q O r a bCVCJ "dO I.. "CC x" `icer''W-�iU-"i "'� y°^� O ° U~a •O W V.0 CiCCd •• aC�tid)" ~�+ yN Q °� bQ� ` �cd �.•f '� �+U" -y' ° •d O Cy CC ' '�U� • V Cd W� [R�j CC mo i"'" "' `--� ��y ��y U CC U ' `..i G"+ Lam+ S.cn4 4 6 OU U0 O o p ° U� tz�yiy U•d H—cd~ • :M,a �Q cd vQi" a p. °CL cd 42 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-23 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program i w A q 0 U 24 a�qcn�A 0 to 0 o to °A 'd 00 b .o � Q � •� A •o pq Ey p O q v � o p y �. :o •.. p � U o U aha A4 P-4 b to O U ��...�, O i+ .� 'C Ps cd O Rr U b U to s. N U fn p cd O cy ° b U "d P4 0b I-. '" >cd u. c� dQ-c- U � O °�' b 123 o a P: c. G, d 8 3 '9 N 'w id W O N ° o a ° �•� ' �,� ° y aUcd R v, (U a c� o a' Owani -d a •0 O 'b �,A *C4 �' 3' .°' 3 a N rol o 1:L 0 b U� C 0 c4 co6 0 6v �p"� 3 cd cd a a� o 0 +� � a) -o b cd W cocd U o Y °bS.° 0 cd O N M �y +�' p y N cid v N •� C cd g v A � i4 b ed ° O �p N U p > cUGnd O j O cd F" w 0 cd cd ¢ « O cd•p C Q, y y o p ,a c~�d p� � + sO. N U U) C A: o O Z 0 w cd o a� a+Uu a as rz° N r a ° o-d�° o cn p�r•a-v°a NU Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-25 � a as A � 0 U o cn o on U :d (Uj :b • � L", 0 F, o ° y 0 o o cd U o `d U ° C ° bo b ��o o � a,�n°'Q bo �. o . cd gib'°1= cc 1.5 Q d� Ow o °�' o a, 3 v v w° o, a�' .o N dV �i t•y N cd VJ ° Q O y V y Go O � y 0 5, a 0 °� 2b cl Gn Uocd v a� s, y ,-: ani �' .. ai O v, o ° + a� ° `d w N o V N° a� G cq c .. b a o b) M-�, .° 0 �' O U i, ej n �o ° t�, v M o 0� . O v U ro)Q 'd cd �cd '� cd r. C/i yy ° U 'd — .9 � 0 � .r"i ycd �,-i�, 0,)0 o cd O py v' O iy O +�+ �d O N cND Qui O N O o A ¢, 'C O (� = P. N U O cd ern OR u �n U OR 0 g O >, .?a on ° cd o - ° ° �O �I M a t,y O N �C O N bU M o, y 0O y 5 3 °�a� M a,M� -�' o 0 �� p o 'b cd 0 �' cl p 4 a Oma`� � v a� cd a m m y ° `d ° cc cd°— p d b °!s, cd ti O O Z• O O m G Y .d �' ami p Y gg c W 0+� o cd°P., U '� b a� o °vQi" cd ; cd p Vs o p d O 'ci0 Ga U 10 N cd NW cd pN V p p O ;^ O O UQ abd + N p d G4 U [J U cd a o ad" Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMRP-25 This page intentionally left blank. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan MMRP-26 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program EXHIBIT C FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 2016-027 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS STATEMENT OFFINDINGS The findings and determinations contained herein are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan (proposed plan) and the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The findings and detenninations constitute the independent findings and detenninations by this City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. Although the findings below identify specific sections within the Draft and Final EIR in support of various conclusions reached below, the City Council incorporates by reference and adopts as its own, the reasoning and analysis set forth in both the Draft and Final EIR and thus relies on that reasoning, even where not specifically mentioned or cited below, in reaching the conclusions set forth below, except where additional evidence is specifically mentioned. This is especially true with respect to the Council's approval of all mitigation measures recommended in the Draft EIR, and the reasoning set forth in responses to comments in the Final EIR. The City Council further intends that if these findings fail to cross-reference or incorporate by reference any other part of these findings, any finding required or permitted to be made by this City Council with respect to any particular subject matter of the proposed plan must be deemed made if it appears in any portion of these findings or findings elsewhere in the record. The Final EIR, comments and responses to comments and all appendices are hereby fully incorporated herein by this reference. I. INTRODUCTION The City of Rohnert Park ("City"), as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has completed the EIR for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2015102081). The Draft EIR, the Final EIR, MMRP, and all the associated appendices comprise the "EIR" referenced in these findings. These CEQA findings are attached as Exhibit C and are incorporated by reference into the resolution certifying the EIR. That resolution also incorporates an Exhibit B, which contains the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ("MMRP"), and which references the proposed plan's impacts, mitigation measures, levels of significance before mitigation, and resulting levels of significance after mitigation. II. THE PROPOSED PLAN The Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan is a programmatic land use master plan, covering an approximately 330 -acre triangular-shaped plan area, bounded by US 101 on the west, the Northwestern Pacific Railroad on the northeast, and Avram Avenue/ Santa Alicia Drive on the south. The proposed plan includes one of 10 rail station stops, within Sonoma County, along the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) line and multi -use path, which follows the existing Northwestern Pacific Railroad line. The existing plan area encompasses a diverse mixed-use area, consisting of multifamily residential, office, light industrial, and retail and service uses; and opportunities for infill development and reuse/redevelopment of vacant and underutilized buildings and properties. The proposed plan is envisioned as a central business area for the city, to include a downtown, urban neighborhoods, and diverse mixed-use subareas that will be improved through mixed-use infill and redevelopment of vacant buildings and sites and streetscape and other public and private improvements. The separate SMART rail station project was strategically moved adjacent to the State Farm property (the largest opportunity site in the plan area), with the vision to create a central downtown for Rohnert Park that would serve as the social and economic heart of the City. The downtown area is envisioned to expand upon recent improvements in the City Center, an area developing with a civic center and mixed- use neighborhood focus in a walkable, urban setting. The proposed plan would include mixed-use infill and redevelopment in an area of the community with existing infrastructure and transit and is intended to be developed as a complete community, with access to a variety of jobs, housing, shopping, services, and transportation options. The plan area is proposed to be organized into five subareas and a new downtown district. The PDA Plan sets assumptions for the maximum expected development potential in the plan area for the purposes of estimating the carrying capacity in the plan area and supports the added development potential of: • 835 multifamily residential units, concentrated within the one-half mile radius of the SMART rail station, in the City Center and Station Center subareas. Allowed densities would range from 12- 75 units per acre. • Up to 440,880 square feet of retail and services, with allowed FARs in the plan area, ranging from a maximum of 0.4 in the Regional Commercial zone, to 1.5 for a mix of non-residential uses and 2.0 for a mix of residential and non-residential uses in the Downtown Mixed -Use zone. • Up to 189,320 square feet of new office facilities, focused within the Triangle Business, City Center, and Station Center subareas and allowing FARs ranging from a maximum of 0.5 in the Industrial with Office Overlay zone (1.0 with discretionary action approval by the Planning Commission and subject to the requirements in the PDA Plan and other city adopted design guidelines) to 1.5 for a mix of non-residential uses and 2.0 for a mix of residential and non- residential uses in the Downtown Mixed -Use zone. • Up to 62,800 square feet of public -institutional uses, with a maximum allowed FAR of 0.5. • Up to 129,320 square feet of light industrial uses in the Triangle Business subarea, allowing for maximum densities of 0.5 (1.0 with approval of discretionary action by the Planning Commission and subject to the requirements in the PDA Plan and other city adopted design guidelines). • 8.5 acres of public parks/open space within the Station Center and Triangle Business subareas. Additional parks, plaza, and open space uses are encouraged to be provided with new development, as required by the city's Zoning Code. A new Downtown District Amenity Zone would be created to focus improvements and investments and support the creation of a walkable downtown area for Rohnert Park. This would be applied as a new zoning overlay district that would include urban design standards and design guidelines that promote compact, multi -story development, flexible approaches to addressing parking demand, and incentives that promote features desired in a downtown setting (e.g., benches, plazas, signage, and lighting). The proposed plan includes new and modifications to existing roadways at certain key sites and transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facility improvements that enhance non -vehicular access in the plan area; connect to and complete regional trails; and support development of existing and new mixed-use areas of the community, with a particular focus on providing community access to the SMART rail station and multi -use path. The PDA Plan proposes development standards and design guidelines to govern all development within the planning area. The Applicant is seeking approval of the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan, as well as applicable General Plan and Zoning Code amendments. The proposed Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan and its accompanying documents are forwarded to City Council for action. As noted above, the proposed plan application includes a request for a General Plan amendment. The current land use designations on the proposed plan site in the Rohnert Park General Plan are High Density Residential, Commercial, Office, Industrial, and Parks/Recreation. The Proposed Plan proposes to amend the configuration of the existing General Plan designations on the site and to add the Mixed - Use designation. If approved, this amendment would amend the Rohnert Park General Plan Land Use Map to accurately reflect the configuration of land uses included in the NWSP. Proposed Plan Objectives As part of the PDA planning process, the City has conducted an extensive public outreach program, including numerous public workshops that engaged citizens, property and business owners, developers, outside agencies, all City departments, and decision makers (Planning Commission and City Council). Out of this outreach process emerged a vision with the following City objectives, as provided in the EIR: • Support the creation of a Downtown for Rohnert Park. Downtown should have the following features: — A distinct character that embraces the community's existing assets (including redwood tree— lined streets, creek trail corridors, neighborhood sections with distinct centers, and rich cultural and recreational amenities). — A pedestrian -oriented development pattern, with a walkable street grid, a compact building footprint, and plenty of community open space. — A mix of uses, with emphasis on lifestyle and specialty retail, entertainment, urban -style living options, public spaces, and other transit -supportive uses (e.g., jobs, housing, and retail). — A variety of public spaces to serve the community. Take advantage of the transit -oriented opportunities adjacent to the SMART rail station to establish distinct subareas with unique community roles. Focus growth around the one-half mile radius of the SMART rail station, as guided by the transit - oriented development objectives of the PDA, Focusing Our Vision (FOCUS) program and regional guidance provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Station Area Planning Manual (MTC, 2007). The Station Area Planning Manual identifies Rohnert Park as a "Transit Town Center" place type, defined as a local -serving economic and community activity center with a mix of single-family and multifamily housing and neighborhood serving retail, employment, and civic uses. • Create and reinforce a consistent urban design theme and identity for Central Rohnert Park and the Downtown District. • Support the transition of the Triangle Business subarea from primarily light industrial uses to a mixed-use business environment, with a mix of light office, light industrial, and more retail and service uses. • Support transit ridership by promoting new infill growth in the plan area, focused within the one- half -mile radius of the SMART rail station. • Plan for transportation improvements, including bus or other circulation opportunities and additional transit stops, to connect the community to SMART rail service and the plan area centers. Support City General Plan Goals TR -I, TR -K, TR -L, and TR -R and Policies TR -24 -TR -34, TR -41, and TR -42 to reduce traffic congestion by encouraging transportation demand management programs for businesses and workplaces and parking standards that help reduce automobile trips, and promoting alternative transportation modes. — Support safe and convenient transit, bicycle, and pedestrian travel modes and connections within the plan area. — Improve the safety of crossing the railroad tracks and roadways that serve as neighborhood barriers (i.e., the SMART rail line and RPX). — Continue to improve creek corridors as major east -west travel routes serving the community and support their future connections to the planned SMART MUP. — Provide a safe and continuous bike and pedestrian trail network, integrated with transit and providing connections to and within the existing shopping centers, commercial areas, and employment centers. — Support investment in placemaking strategies, such as public plazas, sidewalk and landscape improvements, bike/pedestrian connections, and gateway and district wayfinding signage. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED PLAN Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, Code of California Regulations, Title XIV, Section 15000 et seq., the City determined that an EIR should be prepared to analyze the potential environmental effects of the proposed plan. As required under CEQA, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) describing the proposed plan and issues to be addressed in the EIR was distributed to responsible agencies (to state agencies through the State Clearinghouse), and other interested parties for a 30 -day public review period beginning October 29, 2015 and ending November 30, 2015.The City's Planning Department conducted an EIR public scoping meeting on November 18, 2015, to allow interested parties to provide comments on the proposed plan with regard to potential environmental issues that should be considered in the EIR. The Draft EIR was prepared and circulated for a 45 -day public review period, beginning December 18, 2015 and ending February 1, 2016. A public comment session was held to allow interested individuals to present their comments on the Draft EIR in a public forum. The City prepared responses to all comments received on the Draft EIR during the public review, which in some cases required text revisions to the Draft EIR. The responses to comments, text changes to the Draft EIR, and additional inforination have been incorporated into the Final EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR for further review and comment when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR but before certification. New information added to an EIR is not "significant" unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the project proponent declines to implement. The Guidelines provide examples of significant new information under this standard. Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. Though text changes were made to the Draft EIR, the Final EIR does not contain significant new information as defined in the CEQA Guidelines or change the significance conclusions of the Draft FIR, and thus recirculation of the EIR is not required. IV. THE RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS The record upon which all findings and determinations related to the proposed plan are based includes the following: a. The Draft EIR and Final EIR and all documents referenced in or relied upon by the Draft EIR and Final EIR. b. All information (including written evidence and testimony) provided by City staff to the Planning Commission and the City Council, relating to the Draft EIR and Final EIR, the proposed approvals and entitlements, the proposed plan, or its alternatives. c. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council by the environmental consultant and subconsultants who prepared the Draft EIR and Final EIR, are incorporated into reports presented to the Commission and the Council. d. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented to the City from other public agencies, relating to the proposed plan for the Draft EIR and Final EIR. e. All information (including written evidence and testimony) presented at any public hearing or workshop related to the proposed plan, the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR. f. For documentary and information purposes, all locally -adopted land use plans and ordinances, including, without limitation, general plans, specific plans and ordinances, together with environmental review documents, findings, mitigation monitoring and reporting programs, and other documentation relevant to regulation and management of land use in the area. g. The MMRP for the proposed plan. h. All other documents comprising the record pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e). The custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record of proceedings upon which the Council's decision is based are located at the City of Rohnert Park, City Clerk, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928. The custodian of records is the City Clerk. The City Council has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the proposed plan, even if not every document was formally presented to the Council or City staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the proposed plan. These findings are based upon substantial evidence in the entire record before the Council. The references to certain pages or sections of the EIR set forth in these findings are for ease of reference only and are not intended to provide an exhaustive list of the evidence relied upon for these findings. V. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA Public Resources Code section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available that would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]" The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." Section 21002 goes on to state that "in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions snake infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." The mandate and principles announced in Public Resources Code section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Resources Code, §21081, subd. (a); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a).) For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines, §15091, subd. (a)( 1).) The second permissible finding is that "[s]uch 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." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(2).) The third potential conclusion is that "[s]pecific 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." (CEQA Guidelines, §15091, subd. (a)(3).) Public Resources Code section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors." CEQA Guidelines section 15364 adds another factor: "legal" considerations. The concept of "feasibility" also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. "'[F]easibility' under CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding" a significant environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. The City must therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used, Public Resources Code section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate "mitigating" with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such Projects." (Pub. Resources Code, §21002.) For purposes of these findings, the term "avoid" refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less -than -significant level. In contrast, the term "substantially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of such measure or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that effect to a less- than -significant level. Although CEQA Guidelines section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed]," these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a less -than - significant level, or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant. Moreover, although section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely "potentially significant," these findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final EIR. CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant enviromnental impacts that would otherwise occur. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the Project lies with some other agency. (CEQA Guidelines, §15091, subd. (a), (b)•) With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that a project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its "unavoidable adverse environmental effects." (CEQA Guidelines, §§15093, 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, §21081, subd. (b).) The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced. These findings constitute the City Council members' best efforts to set forth the evidentiary and policy bases for its decision to approve the Project in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to implement these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the Council adopts a resolution approving the proposed plan. VTI. CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR In accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City Guidelines, the Council, as lead agency, certifies that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City Guidelines. The Council further certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information in the EIR prior to approving any element of or entitlement for the Proposed Plan. Similarly, the Council finds that it has reviewed the record and the EIR prior to approving any element of or entitlement for the proposed plan. By making these findings, the Council confirms, ratifies and adopts the findings and conclusions of the EIR, as supplemented and modified by the findings contained herein. The EIR and these findings represent the independent judgment and analysis of the City and the Council. The Council certifies that the EIR is adequate to support the approval of the proposed plan. The EIR is adequate for each entitlement or approval required for adoption of the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan. VIII. MITIGATION MEASURES AND MMRP Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require the City to adopt a monitoring plan or reporting program with adoption of the EIR to ensure that the mitigation measures and revisions to the proposed plan identified in the EIR are implemented. The Council finds that the MMRP included in Exhibit B meets these requirements and hereby adopts the MMRP. The mitigation measures recommended by the EIR and incorporated into the proposed plan are specific and enforceable. As appropriate, some mitigation measures define performance standards to ensure no significant environmental impacts occur. The MMRP adequately describes conditions, implementation, verification, a compliance schedule, and reporting requirements to ensure the proposed plan complies with the adopted mitigation measures. The MMRP ensures that the mitigation measures are in place, as appropriate, throughout the life of the proposed plan. The mitigation measures described in Exhibit B are incorporated into these findings as conditions of each of the approvals required for the proposed plan. The mitigation measures set forth in Exhibit B reflect the mitigation measures set forth in the EIR. The City may have modified the language of some of the mitigation measures for purposes of clarification and consistency, to enhance enforceability, to defer more to the expertise of other agencies with jurisdiction over the affected resources, to summarize or strengthen their provisions, and/or to make the mitigation measures more precise and effective, but has made no substantive changes to the mitigation measures. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with Plan mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. IX. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15092, the Council adopts the findings and conclusions regarding impacts and mitigation measures that are set forth in the Draft FIR and Final EIR. These findings do not repeat the full discussions of environmental impacts contained in the Draft EIR and Final EIR. The Council ratifies, adopts, and incorporates the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the Draft EIR and Final EIR. The Council adopts the reasoning of the Draft EIR and Final EIR, of City staff reports, and of City staff and the presentations provided. The Council has, by its review of the evidence and analysis presented in the Draft EIR and Final EIR and in the record, acquired an understanding of the full scope of the environmental issues presented by the proposed plan. In turn, this understanding has enabled the Council to make fully informed, thoroughly considered decisions on these important issues. These findings are based on a full appraisal of the Draft FIR and Final EIR and the record, as well as other relevant information in the record of proceedings for the Proposed Plan. The Council finds that, except as provided in Section XI below, following implementation of mitigation measures identified in the EIR and Exhibit B, all of the proposed plan impacts evaluated by the FIR will be less than significant as determined by the Draft EIR. X. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS NOT FOUND TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND NOT ADDRESSED IN DETAIL IN THE EIR During preparation of the EIR, the issue areas of aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, and utilities and service systems were found not to result in significant impacts and, therefore, were not addressed in detail in the EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15128, the reasons these issues were determined not to be significant are described below. Aesthetics Scenic vistas are visibly prominent landscapes containing scenic resources. Because of the relatively flat topography of the plan area and existing built environment that includes buildings and mature trees, no scenic vistas occur in the plan area. The distant Sonoma Mountains or other ridgeline features may be visible from some locations. However, these views generally are determined by a viewer's position relative to nearby buildings and the height of the nearby tree canopy. The proposed plan would include infill development within an existing urban built environment, which would not substantially alter the quality of existing scenic views from the plan area. Furthermore, maximum building height associated with all new development in the plan area would not exceed 65 feet, and in some subareas, maximum building height would be no greater than 45 feet. The proposed maximum building heights would be consistent with existing conditions and would not substantially alter the visibility of scenic resources surrounding Rohnert Park from within the plan area. Therefore, the impact on scenic vistas would be less than significant. U.S. Highway 101 is the western boundary of the plan area. U.S. 101 is a designated Sonoma County Scenic Corridor. This segment of the scenic highway is partially lined by tall deciduous and conifer trees that provide a visual barrier between the highway and the built -environment features of the city. Gaps in tree coverage allow the built environment in the plan area to be visible. The proposed plan would involve development of multifamily residential units, retail/service commercial uses, public institutional uses, office uses, light industrial uses, public park facilities, and open space. Underused sites would be improved and key areas such as the Station Center would undergo redevelopment. The proposed plan would not substantially alter the quality of scenic views of the plan area from U.S. 101. Therefore, the proposed plan would not substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway, and the impact would be less than significant. As shown in the site photos in EIR Appendix G, the entire plan area consists of a built urban environment. Visibility in the plan area is mostly limited to existing urban features and vegetation (including the tree canopy), but distant ridgelines are also visible from some locations. Viewer perception and related visual sensitivity are influenced by viewer location, the specific activities in which the viewer is engaged, the personal degree of awareness, and individual values and goals. Although scenic resources are present in the city and Sonoma County, impacts on local aesthetic features, such as parks, trails, or architecture, may be more perceptible to local residents and workers. In particular, impacts on these resources may result from conversion of open space to development, building height increases, or new lighting sources. Development of the proposed subareas would require only minimal grading, because the plan area's topography is generally level. Some existing buildings would be demolished to accommodate proposed infill. Impacts on specific development areas are described separately below. Triangle Business Subarea The Triangle Business subarea is occupied by commercial and light industrial or office park uses. The proposed plan would support the development of an additional 129,315 square feet for industrial use, 91,415 square feet of office use, 120,880 square feet for retail or service commercial use, and 2.0 acres of open space uses. A maximum building height of 45 feet would be permitted in the Industrial/Regional Commercial Overlay (I-L/CR) and Downtown Mixed -Use zones, and 65 feet in the Regional Commercial (C-R) zone. Some vacant lots, such as those shown in site photos 8 and 10, may be used to achieve this development potential. These proposed developments would not contrast substantially with the existing industrial and commercial landscape, nor would they provide a substantial contrast to adjacent areas in views of this portion of the plan area. Furthermore, the proposed plan would comply with the City's design guidelines, design guidelines included in the proposed plan, and the City's review processes. The additional development would not differ substantially from the area's existing visual character or alter its existing scenic quality. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. City Center Subarea The City Center is characterized by existing commercial and mixed-use developments and by City public facilities, such as the Public Safety Department and the Rohnert Park—Cotati Regional Library. The proposed plan would include the development in the City Center of 115 units or 103,500 square feet for residential use, 56,581 square feet for retail or service commercial use, 32,560 square feet for office use, and 50,360 square feet of public -institutional use. The residential unit mix would consist of multifamily homes with densities of 12-45 units per acre. With implementation of the proposed plan, upper densities for the DTM-U zone in this subarea would increase from 30 units per acre to 45 units per acre, to support future infill growth. Residential uses in the City Center could support townhouses or two- to three-story lofts above neighborhood commercial uses, with tuck under or garage parking. Currently, the maximum building height in the DTM-U zones, applicable to the City Center, is 45 feet. Public institutional facilities would be located adjacent to the Civic Center. The maximum permitted building height for public institutional uses in the Public/Institutional zone would be 45 feet. As in the Triangle Business subarea, the proposed plan features associated with the City Center subarea would not provide a substantial contrast to adjacent areas in views of this portion of the plan area. Any new developments would comply with the City's design guidelines, design guidelines included in the proposed plan, and the City's review processes. The additional development would not differ substantially from the area's existing visual character or alter its existing scenic quality. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Central Commercial Subarea The Central Commercial subarea consists primarily of retail business and restaurants. A senior living facility is located near the intersection of Enterprise Drive and State Farm Drive. The proposed plan would include the development of 74,264 square feet for retail or service commercial uses and 12,445 square feet for public institutional uses. The commercial uses would be one- to two- story infill development, consistent with the scale of buildings in this subarea and allowing a maximum building height in the C-R zone of 65 feet. Public institutional uses would consist of one- to two- story buildings with supporting parking and landscape improvements, to support expansion of existing public institutional facilities or new infill development in the subarea. Maximum permitted building heights for public -institutional uses in the P -I zone would be 45 feet. The proposed plan features associated with the Central Commercial subarea would not provide a substantial contrast to adjacent subareas in views of this portion of the plan area. As in the Triangle Business and City Center subareas, proposed developments would comply with the City's design guidelines, design guidelines contained in the proposed plan, and the City's review processes. The additional development would not differ substantially from the area's existing visual character or alter its existing scenic quality. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Station Center Subarea The Station Center subarea currently consists of vacant areas, formerly used as the State Farm campus and the Rohnert Park Corporation Yard. Implementation of the proposed plan would involve redeveloping the site. The proposed Station Center subarea would include the development of an additional 415 units or 415,000 square feet for residential uses, 171,626 square feet for retail or service commercial uses, and 65,340 square feet for office uses. New office uses would consist of two- to three-story standalone or mixed-use buildings where maximum building heights, as established for the Station Center Office zone, would be 65 feet. Commercial development would replace the existing development downtown, including one to two retail and service uses, with supporting parking and landscape improvements. Maximum building heights established in the Station Center Commercial Mixed -Use and Station Center Residential Mixed -Use zones also would be 65 feet. The Station Center is envisioned to support a variety of multifamily residential housing units with densities ranging from 12 to 75 units per acre, including townhouses, mixed-use lofts or flats above neighborhood commercial uses, and podium -style apartments or condominiums. Townhouses and mixed-use lofts in the Station Center subarea are anticipated to be two to three stories high and five - and six -story apartments or condominiums over podium parking are envisioned in this subarea, as supported by market conditions in the future. Maximum building heights for high-density residential uses would be 65 feet. Changes to existing views of the site would be most perceptible from the surrounding Central Commercial, City Center, and Creekside Neighborhood subareas. The Station Center, with its conversion of the State Farm campus, would undergo the most visual change in the plan area. The existing buildings are set back approximately 200 feet or more from the property boundaries. The proposed Station Center subarea would reduce setbacks and encourage denser site development. However, open space would still be included along the southern and eastern edges of this subarea and in the northwest corner to preserve the redwood trees on-site. In addition, with heights of up to 65 feet, the proposed developments would not exceed the height of existing features, such as trees, on the State Farm campus. Approximately 6 acres of open space would be included in redevelopment of the Station Center. Proposed landscaping would include native trees, planted in a columnar fashion along major roadways, to enhance the existing corridor. Trees and other vertical landscape elements also could be used as background plants at community gateway entrances or could be planted along roadway medians. The proposed plan would comply with the City's design guidelines, design guidelines contained in the proposed plan, and the City's review processes. The additional development would not differ substantially from the area's existing visual character or alter its existing scenic quality. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Creekside Neighborhood Subarea This subarea is characterized by multifamily residential development connected by local roads. The maximum building height currently permitted in the Downtown High Density Residential zone of the Creekside Neighborhood is 45 feet. The development of this subarea would add 155 units or 170,500 square feet of residential use and 17,534 square feet of retail or service commercial use. The existing DTR -H zone in the Creekside Neighborhood subarea permits a wide range of detached single-family and attached multifamily housing, at densities ranging from 12.1 to 30 units per gross acre. A few vacant sites along Avram Avenue may accommodate some of this proposed development. The retail and service commercial uses in the plan area would accommodate one- to two- story infill development, consistent with the scale of buildings existing in shopping centers in this subarea. Development of underused sites in the Creekside Neighborhood would not differ substantially from the existing aesthetic quality of multifamily residences in this area. Furthermore, the proposed development would comply with the City's design guidelines; design guidelines contained in the proposed plan; and associated city review processes. The additional development would not differ substantially from the area's existing visual character or alter its existing scenic quality. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. The plan area is located in a built urban environment that consists of developed commercial, industrial, and residential units where light and glare already are evident. Light and glare associated with the proposed plan would be similar to light and glare from typical residential, commercial, and mixed-use developments. All site and building lighting would be installed in conformance with the City's lighting and glare performance standards, as set forth in Section 17.12.050 of the Municipal Code. All lighting, reflective surfaces or any other sources of illumination would be used in a manner to minimize glare on public streets or other parcels. Lighting would be directed downward and away from adjacent residences. Therefore, the proposed plan would not create significant new light or glare in the plan area. This impact would be less than significant. Agriculture and Forestry Resources The plan area is currently the location of existing residential, commercial, office, and light industrial development with associated paved parking areas. The plan area does not contain land that is designated as prime agricultural soils by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (now Natural Resources Conservation Service), nor does it contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as designated by the California Department of Conservation, or any forest land or timberland. The proposed plan is not subject to, nor is the plan area located near, a Williamson Act contract site pursuant to Sections 51200-51207 of the California Government Code. In addition, the plan area is designated as developed land and not designated as farmland under the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Department of Conservation or the City of Rohnert Park General Plan. No portion of the plan area could be considered forest land as defined in PRC Section 12220(g). Timberland, as defined by PRC Section 4526, or timberland -zoned timberland production, as defined by Section 51104[g] of the Government Code, is not present on- site, nor- are any active or potential commercial timber operations present in the area. Therefore, no impact associated with agriculture and forestry resources would result from implementation of the proposed plan. Land Use and Planning The plan area is an established and developed urban environment with open space, public institutions (i.e., the city's public safety building and a regional library), industrial, office, retail, and residential uses. Implementation of the proposed plan would build on the existing urban framework to support greater mixed-use areas in the five designated subareas; this would include identifying areas for infill redevelopment and improving existing development. Existing roadways that provide connections to and from the plan area—such as Golf Course Drive, Rohnert Park Expressway, Commerce Boulevard, and Seed Farm Drive—would continue to connect the plan area with adjacent roadways and developments/residences. The existing street grid would remain, and roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and corresponding circulation connections would be improved. These improvements would provide greater connectivity within the site and to the adjacent areas. Furthermore, the proposed plan would not involve the construction of a physical barrier that would restrict access through the plan area. The proposed plan therefore would not divide an established community and this impact would be less than significant. Implementation of the proposed plan would have a significant impact if it would conflict with an adopted plan, policies, or regulations. A consistency analysis of the proposed plan relative to the General Plan is provided in EIR Appendix H. General Plan policies not included were determined to have no relationship to the proposed plan and/or plan area. Implementation of the proposed plan would be consistent with the applicable listed policies. The City would enact conditions of approval on a project -specific basis to maintain consistency and enforcement of the future development under the proposed plan. The proposed plan would retain most of the current zoning designations for the plan area, including Regional Commercial (C-R), Industrial (I -L), Industrial with Office Overlay (I-L/O), and Public/Institutional (P-1) shown in the September 2014 zoning map. Current uses and development standards would remain in place for areas with no change in zoning. The proposed plan incorporates the new Downtown High Density Residential and Downtown Mixed -Use zoning designations that update development standards for mixed-use and high density residential uses in the plan area, permitting a maximum density of 30 units per acre in DTR -H zone and 45 units per acre in the DTM-U zone. Addition of the new DTR -H and DTM-U would require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, including associated text updates and updates to the City's official zoning map as well as, related updates to the General Plan. The proposed plan adds an Industrial with Regional Commercial Overlay in the northern portion of the Triangle Business subarea. The new I-L/CR zone allows for the types of industrial uses and associated development standards that are normally permitted in the I -L zone, but also would allow uses otherwise permitted only in the C-R zone. The proposed new I-L/CR zoning designation is currently within an Industrial land use designation, zoned Industrial, and would require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, requiring associated text updates and updates to the City's official Zoning Map. A new Downtown District Amenity Overlay is proposed to implement the community's vision for a compact, walkable downtown area. This area, to be the primary focus of downtown investment in the plan area, encompasses several subareas of PDA, connected internally across Rohnert Park Expressway and State Farm Drive. The proposed DDAZ overlay would incorporate urban design standards and guidelines that allow buildings to be built to the edge of the sidewalk; allows for wide sidewalks and pedestrian amenities along commercial streets; promotes compact, multistory development, shared and on -street parking, and use of transit; and may incentivize amenities desired in a downtown setting (e.g., benches, plazas, signage, and lighting). Implementation of this overlay zone would require Zoning Ordinance amendments, including updates to the official Zoning Map. Updates to the General Plan would also be required. The proposed plan would also rezone the Station Center subarea to Planned Development (PD). The PD zone would introduce a new set of zoning districts in this subarea to support its site conditions. The proposed PD zoning district is currently within an Office and Public/Institutional land use designation, zoned Office Commercial and P -I, and would require both General Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendments, including an update to the General Plan Map to designate this area as a "mixed-use" and an update to the Zoning Map to reflect the new PD designation for this subarea. The proposed plan would be required to comply with the policies of the General Plan, per Section 65454 of the California Government Code. The proposed plan would retain the C-R, I -L, I-L/O, and P-1 zoning. If the proposed plan is adopted, the City would amend the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to match the proposed plan. Adoption of the proposed plan would include development standards and provisions to include the design guidelines of the proposed plan in the City's development review process. These specific standards and design guidelines would enhance future development of the plan area. Therefore, once changes have been made to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the proposed plan would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. As a result, the proposed plan would not conflict with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations and impacts would be less than significant. The proposed plan would not conflict with any habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans because no approved plans apply to the plan area. No impact would occur. Mineral Resources Based on a review of the mineral land classification maps, the plan area is designated as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 1 classification area by the California Geological Survey. MRZ-1 areas are defined as areas where adequate infonnation indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. The plan area is urban, currently the location of existing development; is not designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site; and does not have an operating mine, sampling area, or available known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact associated with mineral resources would result from implementation of the proposed plan. Population and Housing Implementation of the proposed plan would result in construction of up to an additional 835 residential units on a total of approximately 20 acres in the City Center and Station Center subareas and within a half -mile radius of the Sonoma -Marin Area Rail Transit rail station. The existing population of the plan area is an estimated 3,187 people. With construction of up to 835 residential units, the population of the plan area and the city would increase by 1,670 residents. Rohnert Park is expected to grow by approximately 6,861 people between 2013 and 2020. The proposed plan represents approximately 24.3 percent of anticipated population growth in the city between 2013 and 2020, and 6 percent of the projected total 2020 population in the city, which is estimated at 47,900 residences. Because the Association of Bay Area Governments projects the population of Rohnert Park to increase by 6,861 from the 2013 population estimates by 2020, 1,670 additional residents in the area from implementation of the proposed plan would be consistent with population projections for the city and would not be considered substantial unplanned growth in the area. Indirect population growth can be attributed to nonresidential development or the extension of roads or other infrastructure. The proposed plan would include a maximum of 440,886 square feet of retail and service commercial facilities; up to 62,807 square feet of public institutional facilities; up to 189,315 net square feet of office facilities; up to 129,315 net square feet of new light industrial facilities; and improvements to plan area circulation, which would include roadways, bike/pedestrian facilities, and transit facilities. Nonresidential development included in the proposed plan would create approximately 1,900 jobs and could increase housing demand. For a conservative analysis, it is assumed that all 1,900 employees would relocate to the area, introducing 1,900 employee -related residents to Rohnert Park. In combination with the 1,670 permanent residents added by new residential development, 3,570 additional residents would constitute approximately 52 percent of the growth anticipated in 2020 ABAG projections for the City. This level of indirect growth would be consistent with ABAG's projection for Rohnert Park by 2020. Therefore, the impact associated with population growth resulting from permanent jobs would be less than significant. Construction of future development is anticipated to generate temporary construction -related jobs. However, construction -related employment opportunities would be unlikely to cause construction workers to relocate their households to the plan area vicinity for various reasons: • Construction employment has no regular place of business; rather, construction workers commute to job sites that may change several times a year. • Many construction workers are highly specialized (e.g., crane operators, steelworkers, masons) and move from job site to job site, as dictated by the demand for their skills. • The work requirements of most construction projects also are highly specialized, and workers are employed on a job site only as long as their skills are needed to complete a particular phase of the construction process. • Some construction workers are likely to be drawn from the construction employment labor force already present in Rohnert Park and surrounding communities. Consequently, project -related construction workers would not be likely to relocate their place of residence as a result of working on future developments under the proposed plan. The impact associated with population growth resulting from temporary jobs would be less than significant. Overall, the amount of new development projected under the proposed plan would not exceed ABAG's most recent projections or other planning efforts for population or housing in the city. No housing units would be demolished; thus, no replacement housing units would be needed. The State Farm carnpus site and the City Corporation Yard would be removed and redeveloped as part of the Station Center subarea, which would pen -nit commercial, residential, and park/open space uses. The proposed plan would not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the impact on population and housing from implementation of the proposed plan would be less than significant. Public Services Implementing the proposed plan would add 835 new residential units and 822,324 square feet of nonresidential development (retail or service commercial, office, public -institutional, and industrial) to the plan area. Under existing conditions the plan area accommodates 1,390 residential units for an estimated population of 2,780 people and includes a total of 2,717,414 square feet of nonresidential development. The total development potential of the proposed plan would result in a total population of 4,450 people and 3,249,337 square feet of total nonresidential development in the plan area at build -out. Build -out of the plan area would represent an increase of approximately 40 percent in the total existing residential population of the plan area, and an increase of approximately 30 percent over the nonresidential development currently existing in the plan area. Fire Protection The Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety currently adheres to National Fire Protection Agency standards, which are a recommended 4 -minute response time, with 67 percent of calls having an average response time of 4 minutes, 23 seconds. In addition, the City's Fire Division has two fire stations in the vicinity of the plan area, with travel time to the plan area of approximately 2 minutes for the first responder (Southern Station). This would meet the Fire Division's response time goal of 4 minutes, 23 seconds to 67 percent of calls. In addition, the backup responder (Northern Station) has a travel time to the plan area of approximately 4 minutes, which would also meet the Fire Division's response time goal. Furthermore, facilities in the plan area would be required to comply with applicable building and fire safety codes, including availability of water for fire suppression, emergency vehicle access, and fire safety regulations for various building types in the plan area. The Fire Division also would be notified of any temporary and short-term impacts on fire protection services resulting from construction activities, such as street closures. In addition, General Plan Policy HS -26 requires that new development in the northwest portion of the city (north of Business Park Drive and west of U.S. 10 1) contribute funds to the public facilities financing plan associated with the Wilfred-Dowdell Village development for construction of a fire station facility, as such new development would benefit from the additional fire protection services. Development of the plan area may require additional staff and equipment. However, stipulations in the General Plan require that new development contribute to the cost of service needs, including fire protection. In summary, the response times to the plan area of the Southern Station and backup Northern Station are within the Fire Division's adopted response time standard of 4 minutes, 23 seconds to 67 percent of calls and no new fire station facilities are required to serve the plan area. General Plan build -out includes development of the plan area in a quantity that would surpass the planned build -out of the proposed plan. Therefore, the impact related to fire protection would be less than significant. Police Protection The City's Police Division is headquartered at 500 City Center Drive, within the northeastern segment of the plan area. Development of the plan area may require additional police protection services as the implementation of the proposed plan would include up to 1,670 new residences, 1,900 new jobs, and an unquantifiable number of visitors associated with correlated new businesses and services. Additional police protection services associated with the city's build -out is anticipated in the General Plan. New development projects located within the city limits are required to contribute to the cost of service needs, including police protection and related facilities to ensure the City provides adequate police protection services, consistent with stipulated General Plan Policy HO -18.8 (provide equitable public services throughout the city). The City's public safety building was recently constructed in the City Center subarea and is within the plan area. With this existing facility, no additional facilities for police protection services would be needed to serve the plan area. Therefore, the impact related to police protection would be less than significant. Schools Implementation of the proposed plan would include up to 1,670 new residences and 1,900 new jobs for new residents expected to relocate to the City as a result. This would increase the demand for school services, provided by the Cotati—Rohnert Park Unified School District. As of the 2013-2014 school year, CRPUSD schools (which provide elementary, middle, and high school education), except for Lawrence Jones Middle School and Technology High School, were operating below maximum student capacity. Additional school services associated with the city's build -out is anticipated in the General Plan. All development in the plan area associated with the proposed plan would comply with General Plan Policy PF -2 (work with CRPUSD to provide adequate high school sites) by complying with General Plan Policy PF -3 (requiring developers to help dedicated any necessary new school sites). Development (residential and commercial) associated with the proposed plan would generate school impact fees to be collected by CRPUSD in compliance with General Plan Policies PF -2 and PF -3. In accordance with Section 65996 of the California Government Code, payment of such school impact fees would mitigate the impact of the proposed plan area development on school services. Furthermore, according to the City of Rohnert Park General Plan Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report, elementary school enrollment is expected to decline and middle school enrollment is expected to stagnate in the future. No new schools are needed to serve the plan area; therefore, the impact related to schools for the plan area would be less than significant. Parks The population increase that would result from plan area build -out (1,670 new residents) would require 8.4 acres of new parkland to meet the standard outlined in the General Plan and Municipal Code of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. A total of 8.5 acres of public parks/open space uses are included in the proposed plan. Approximately 6 acres would be part of redevelopment in the Station Center subarea. The other 2.5 acres of open space would be provided for open space and bike and pedestrian access in the Triangle Business subarea. Therefore, the proposed plan would include dedicated parkland that exceeds City requirements and the impact on parks would be less than significant. Libraries The Rohnert Park—Cotati Library is located in the City Center subarea, within the plan area. Designed to serve up to 73,463 people by 2025, the library currently serves a total of approximately 54,654 people; thus, it can accommodate an additional 18,809 people by 2025. Furthermore, the library was designed for and is intended to accommodate future expansion onto the second floor, so that it could serve a larger population in the future. The library has the available capacity to serve the estimated 1,670 new residents projected to live within the plan area at build -out of the proposed plan. Therefore, the impact related to libraries would be less than significant. Recreation Along the west side of Commerce Boulevard, the City maintains 16.7 acres of existing public open space adjacent to U.S. 101 along accessible, marked trails in the existing Copeland Creek and Hinebaugh Creek corridors and interconnecting paseos. The proposed plan would generate an additional estimated 1,670 residents, and thus would likely increase the use of existing recreational facilities. A total of 8.5 additional acres of public parks, open space, and recreational uses have been identified in the plan area. Approximately 6 acres have been identified as part of redevelopment in the Station Center subarea and 2.5 acres of open space are suggested for an approximately 25 foot - wide paseo between Professional Drive and Utility Court and for other open space, to improve bike and pedestrian access in the Triangle Business subarea. Additionally, the proposed plan would require new development in the plan area to comply with park, open space, and facility standards in the General Plan and Municipal Code. SMART will construct a multiuse pathway along the eastern edge of the plan area. The proposed plan would include trail connectivity improvements, such as along the creek corridors and paseos, to fill the gaps in the City's regional bicycle trail network and connect to the SMART multiuse pathway. Parks, plazas, open space, or other recreational facilities would be provided and dispersed within the plan area. Therefore, a total of 25.2 acres of public parks/open space uses (including the existing 16.7 acres of open space) are proposed in the plan area, based on site studies for the plan area. Additional parks/open space uses that would be required to be provided for new development in compliance with City standards are not factored into the park/open space totals for the plan area. Furthermore, trail connectivity improvements along the planned SMART multiuse path and surrounding public roadways in the city would be provided along the two existing creeks. The proposed plan would accommodate an estimated increase of 1,670 new residents in the plan area at build -out (based on a total of 835 units multiplied by two people per household). Based on the City's goal of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, build -out of the proposed plan would generate a demand for 8.4 additional acres of park/open space in the plan area. The proposed plan would provide a minimum of 8.5 acres of parkland acreage and increased trail connectivity and access. With additional parks and open space uses required for new development in the plan area, the proposed plan would be able to satisfy the parkland target for the plan area. Furthermore, it is not expected that future residents in the plan area would substantially increase demand on other City facilities and cause deterioration of those facilities. The proposed plan also includes Policy CS -1.1, which requires new development to provide park and open space facilities in accordance with City parkland requirements. The additional 8.5 acres of public parks/open space and trail system would be constructed using low -impact development design components, as guided by the City of Santa Rosa and County of Sonoma Storinwater Low Impact Development Technical Design Manual. These design components would reduce construction -related and operational impacts by managing storinwater runoff and preserving natural hydrologic regimes in the plan area. Other potential effects associated with construction and operation of the proposed recreational facilities are covered as part of the overall plan, and are evaluated under each individual topic in this environmental impact report. Therefore, the recreation impacts of implementing the proposed plan would be less than significant. Utilities and Service Systems Wastewater Build -out of the proposed plan would result in the treatment and disposal of an additional 0.18 million gallons per day (gpd) of wastewater. Wastewater generated by developments associated with the proposed plan would not contain hazardous materials or other constituents that would require pretreatment and potentially cause violations of established water quality standards. As such, wastewater generated by build -out of the proposed plan could be safely discharged to the City's existing sanitary sewer system. The plan area is currently served by the City's sewer collection system. This system consists of 77 miles of gravity sewers, 7.5 miles of force mains, 16 inverted siphons, and three pump stations that convey sewage to the treatment facility. Most facilities were installed between 1956 and 1980 and the average age is estimated to be 30 years. Pipe sizes in the plan area range from 6 inches to 42 inches. The City's two main interceptor sewers cross the plan area. In the northerly portion of the plan area, the 27 -inch College Trunk Sewer crosses through the Triangle Business subarea near Executive Court, collects effluent on the east side of U.S. 101 at Commerce Boulevard, and continues west under the freeway and follows the road alignment of J Rogers Lane, At the southern edge of the plan area, the 27- to 42 -inch Eastside Trunk Sewer traverses Santa Alicia Drive and Avram Avenue, collects effluent at the east side of U.S. 101 at Commerce Boulevard, continues west under the freeway, and follows Redwood Boulevard to the terminal pump station. The Eastside Trunk Sewer was designed both to provide capacity for new development in eastern part of the city and to resolve capacity problems in the College Trunk Sewer and other portions of the collection system. The construction of the Eastside Trunk Sewer rerouted some flow that historically drained to the 27 -inch - diameter sewer that parallels U.S. 101 along the western border of the plan area, resolving the plan area's only known capacity problem. Together, the two trunk sewers provide a high degree of capacity and flexibility for serving development in the plan area, although localized collection system infrastructure may require improvements to serve specific development proposals. Wastewater treatment and disposal is provided by the Santa Rosa Subregional Water Reclamation System, which also serves the cities of Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, and Cotati. Wastewater from the Subregional System is treated at the Laguna Water Reclamation Plant, located about 2 miles northwest of Rohnert Park. The City owns capacity rights to 3.43 million gallons per day (MGD) at the Laguna Water Reclamation Plant and has an agreement with the City of Santa Rosa to use up to 4.46 MGD of capacity rights. Under the Subregional System's approved Incremental Recycled Water Program, the City can acquire up to 5.15 MGD of capacity. The City's current capacity needs are approximately 3.0 MGD, meaning that up to 2.15 MGD of capacity is available to serve new development. Build -out of the plan area would generate up to 0.18 MGD of additional wastewater flow or 8 percent of the available build -out capacity. Because the capacity required to serve the plan area can be accommodated by the City's existing approved wastewater capacity and would not result in the need for any new off-site wastewater system expansions that are not already documented in the approved Incremental Recycled Water System Program EIR, the impacts of implementing the proposed plan would be less than significant. Water Supply As required by state law, the City has prepared a water supply assessment (WSA) to evaluate the impacts of the plan. This WSA, included as Appendix F, documents that build -out of the plan area would generate demand for an additional 213 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water above the demand generated by General Plan build -out. The discussion below summarizes the information and analysis included in the WSA. The City has three water sources: Sonoma County Water Agenc supply, local groundwater, and recycled water. The City manages these supplies using a "conjunctive use" strategy, drawing on SCWA and recycled -water supplies first and using its local groundwater to manage peak demands. The total supply available to the City through these three sources is 11,427 AFY, including 10,077 AFY of potable water and 1,350 AFY of recycled water. The City's contract for water supply with SCWA is the Restructured Agreement for Water Supply. Under this contract, the City has access to as much as 7,500 AFY, although a number of conditions can limit the SCWA supply. Because of these limitations, the City uses 6,372 AFY as its reliable supply from SCWA under all hydrologic conditions. Over the past 10 years, the City has used between 2,500 and 5,000 AFY of SCWA supply, which is significantly less than its maximum allocation. The City's local groundwater supply is from the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of the Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin. The City manages its groundwater supply in accordance with its 2004 Water Policy Resolution, which limits groundwater pumping to 2,577 AFY. The City's 2004 City-wide Water Supply Assessment provides the technical support for this maximum pumping rate. The City participates actively in the implementation of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed Groundwater Management Plan and is currently working with other water suppliers in the basin to implement the requirements of the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014. Modeling and monitoring data collected by the City and others indicate that groundwater levels are generally rising around the City's well field, an indication of stable supply. Over the past 10 years the City has used between 350 and 1,600 AFY of groundwater, significantly less than its policy limitation on groundwater use. The City's tertiary -treated recycled -water supply is produced by the Santa Rosa Subregional Water Reclamation System. The City and the Subregional System have recently entered into a producer/ distributor agreement that provides the City with access to 1,350 AFY of recycled water. The City uses recycled water primarily for irrigation purposes; demand for recycled water has varied between 800 and 1,100 AFY over the past 10 years. The City has recently completed its 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand and Water Conservation Measures Update. This analysis, which is based on ABAG population and job projections, including projections for both the plan area and the Sonoma Mountain Village Priority Development Area, projects the City's potable water demands through 2040. This demand is expected to range between 5,600 and 6,100 AFY, depending on the level of water conservation undertaken by the City. This projected demand is significantly less than the City's available water supplies. This analysis also indicates that the City has the potential to secure approximately 500 AFY (the difference between 5,600 and 6,100 AFY) by undertaking more aggressive water conservation activities. Water Delivery Infrastructure The City's SCWA water supply is delivered through 13 turnout connections from the SCWA aqueduct system. There are five aqueduct turnouts in the plan area and a City -owned, 12 -inch aqueduct pressure transmission main runs along the Hinebaugh Creek channel through the plan area. The City's groundwater is supplied by a well field consisting of 42 municipal supply wells, 29 of which are active. The City's wells are connected directly to the distribution system. In the plan area, the water distribution system consists primarily of 6- and 8 -inch water mains (see Figure 2-11 in Chapter 2.0, "Project Description"). The City has a planned capital improvement project that will parallel the 4 -inch distribution mains at the north end of the plan area with an 8 -inch distribution main to improve the overall perfonnance of the distribution system. Recycled water is delivered through the City's high-pressure system, which consists of a 24 -inch backbone transmission pipe running along the Copeland Creek channel. Two turnouts from the recycled -water system are located in the plan area. One turnout runs south to serve City Hall (located in the Creekside Neighborhood subarea) and the second turnout runs north, parallel to the SMART rail line right-of-way, and serves the City Center subarea. Recycled -water service was historically provided to the Station Center subarea, but this service is no longer active. In general, the existing water supply sources and facilities are expected to be sufficient to provide an adequate supply of water to meet the plan area's current and future demands. A planned capital improvement project will remove the one restriction in the distribution system that serves the plan area. The proposed plan alone would not result in the need for new water treatment or storage facilities, other than the on-site facilities included as part of the plan. In addition, the proposed plan alone would not require SCWA to increase its existing water entitlements; SCWA has an adequate supply to meet the demands associated with the plan area. Furthermore, the proposed plan's impacts on water would be reduced further with implementation of policies included in the General Plan, including use of reclaimed water, discharge reduction programs, and water metering. Additionally, the proposed plan includes Policy U-1.1, which requires ensuring that an adequate water supply is available to serve the plan area. With the implementation of water conservation programs implemented by the City, reducing the City's demand by 384-556 AFY by build -out of the proposed plan, the City would effectively offset the potential increase in demand from the proposed plan. Therefore, the water supply and related facility impacts would be less than significant. Stormwater The plan area is served by the City's existing storm drainage system, which conveys stormwater through closed conduits (pipes) to SCWA's system of open channels, which in turn divert major drainage flows west toward the Laguna de Santa Rosa. In the plan area, Hinebaugh and Copeland Creeks convey storm drainage from east to west. The existing storm drainage infrastructure in the plan area is operating within its design capacity, although the system's design does allow street flooding (but not building flooding) near Commerce Boulevard, Avram Avenue, and Enterprise Drive in severe storm events. No portions of any parcel in the plan area have been designated as being located in a Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Hazard Zone that may be subject to localized flooding during a 100 -year or 500 -year storm event. The May 29, 2009, technical memorandum "Storm Water System Model Study—Phase IV" recommended improving the Copeland Creek culverts and channel to reduce modeled flooding for a 100 -year storm event. As an option to culvert and channel improvements, the memorandum also suggested reducing the peak 100 -year discharge by constructing a detention pond in the upper reach of the watershed. The City is currently partnering with SCWA on the design and implementation of the upstream detention basin. Although some of the land in the plan area is currently underused, the area is largely developed and paved, and implementing the proposed plan would not result in significant changes in runoff volume or velocity. However, all new development or site redevelopment of any scale would need to comply with the City's storm drain standards, including the City of Santa Rosa and County of Sonoma's Low Impact Development Technical Design Manual. Design requirements include the requirements to treat all runoff generated by the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm and to ensure that the volume of runoff from the site in the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm does not increase as a result of development or redevelopment. The LID Manual includes a menu of best management practices that can be used to capture, infiltrate, and/or reuse stormwater on-site. Some of the LID Manual's best management practices are also incorporated in the design guidelines for the plan area. Because the existing stormwater system provides adequate protection to the plan area and because existing design requirements and plan policies will minimize any increases in stormwater runoff or changes in stormwater quality, the stormwater-related impacts would be less than significant. Solid Waste The North Bay Corporation provides solid waste disposal and composting of organic materials in the city. Build -out of the plan area would result in an additional 1,670 residents and 1,900 employees. Using the 2011 daily per capita disposal rate from Sonoma County Waste Management Agency, uses associated with the proposed plan would generate approximately 12.696 tons of solid waste per day. This amount represents 0.5 percent of the Central Disposal Landfill's maximum daily throughput of 2,500 tons per day. Long term, it is speculative as to whether wastes would be disposed at the Central Disposal Landfill; however, any future waste export agreement between the City and the SCWMA would be subject to its own environmental review. Furthermore, the proposed plan includes Policy U-1.5 to ensure that existing solid disposal services could meet the demand from the existing and proposed development in the plan area. Based on the available information, the impact of the proposed plan related to an increase in demand for solid waste collection and disposal in the city would be less than significant. Assembly Bill (AB) 939 requires the City to develop and implement a solid waste management program. PRC Section 41780(a)(2) also requires cities and counties to divert 50 percent of the solid waste produced within their respective jurisdictions through source reduction, recycling, and/or composting activities. Since 2007, Senate Bill 1016 has required cities to report to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (now known as CalRecycle) the amount of garbage disposed in the landfill per person per day. According to CalRecycle's jurisdiction/disposal rate detail for SCWMA for the 2011 reporting year, SCWMA's residential disposal target is 7.1 pounds per person per day. Rohnert Park's annual residential disposal rate of 3.6 pounds per person per day met this target in 2014. The employee disposal target (18.3 pounds per employee per day) was also met, with an actual employee disposal rate of 10.2 pounds per employee per day. Waste reduction and disposal framework developed by the City and SCWMA would guide any future development in the plan area. The plan area would not contain features that would generate waste flows at rates that would exceed typical disposal rates for the City; therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Electricity and Natural Gas Equipment used during construction under the proposed plan would run on diesel fuel. Therefore, demand for electricity and natural gas resources would not increase. Furthermore, Tier 3 (energy- efficient) construction equipment would be used whenever possible, and diesel -fueled equipment would not be left idling. The plan area would be served by Pacific Gas and Electric Company for both electricity and natural gas service. Using the Energy Consumption Data Management System for total energy and natural gas demand from Sonoma County, residential uses in the plan area would demand approximately 0.98 kilowatt-hour of electricity per person each day. In addition, implementing the proposed plan would generate demand for residential, commercial, and industrial consumption of natural gas. The City is served by PG&E, which allocates its existing supply of natural gas based on demand. Therefore, increased demand for electricity and natural gas attributable to the proposed plan would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned PG&E service systems. Therefore, the impact related to electricity and natural gas consumption would be less than significant. Because the proposed plan would follow applicable Title 24 standards related to energy efficiency, implementing the proposed plan would not encourage or result in activities that consume large amounts of fuel, water, or energy in an inefficient manner. Furthermore, the proposed plan includes Policy CD -2.2, promoting sustainable development practices that result in more energy- and water - efficient development. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. The Sonoma County Community Climate Action Plan, along with the Rohnert Park Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan, reflects the City's primary strategies for ensuring that build -out of the General Plan would not conflict with implementation of AB 32. The proposed plan would not conflict with this or any other applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing energy use, particularly nonrenewable energy use. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. XI. IMPACTS EVALUATED IN THE EIR AND DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION MEASURES The City Council agrees with the characterization in the Final EIR with respect to all Impacts initially identified as "significant" or "potentially significant" that would be less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a), a specific finding is made for each impact and its associated mitigation measures, as provided in the table in Exhibit D. Impact Criteria, as included in the EIR, are included below to provide context for each Impact identified. The Council again ratifies, adopts, and incorporates the full analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the EIR. The following impacts were identified in the EIR as potentially significant prior to mitigation and less than significant after mitigation: 3.1 a: Potential for construction -related and operational emissions to conflict or obstruct with the implementation of the applicable air quality plan. 3.1b: Construction -related NOx emissions or operational ROG and NOx emissions violating an air quality standard through exceedance of the BAAQMD 2010 standard of significance. 3.1c: Potential for construction -related and operational emissions of ozone precursors, criteria air pollutants, TACs, and odors to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. 3.1d: Potential exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of construction - related PM and TAC emissions. Potential exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of operational TAC emissions. 3.1e: Potential for operational activities to expose a substantial number of people to objectionable odors. 3.2a: Potential adverse impacts on special - status plant species. Potential loss of habitat and temporary disturbance of migratory birds. Potential for adverse effects on special -status fish, including mortality, caused by increases in water turbidity from runoff during near -stream construction. Potential disturbance of aquatic dispersal habitat for special -status amphibian species during construction. Potential for construction activities to cause injury to the western pond turtle or for project activities to increase water turbidity and 3.4b: Potential soil erosion or loss of topsoil, 3.4c: Exposure of people and property to subsidence, compression, expansion, and liquefaction of unstable soils. 3.4d: Exposure of people and property to expansive soils that can result in damage to building foundations, underground utilities, and other subsurface facilities and infrastructure if not designed to resist damage. 3.5a: Generation of short-term and temporary exhaust -related GHG emissions during construction. Generation of long-term operational emissions associated with the daily operational activities of plan land uses, including transportation, use of electricity and natural gas for lighting, cooling, and heating, and powering of machinery. 3.6d: On-site project location that is included in the list of hazardous material sites and could expose people (construction workers, future businesses, and employees and the public) to contaminated soil and/or groundwater, including indoor air quality effects from vapor intrusion. Potential exposure to asbestos -containing materials or other hazardous materials or situations from the reuse and redevelopment of properties in the plan area, which have been developed with existing structures and may contain asbestos and lead-based paint. 3.6g: Impaired implementation of or physical interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. 3.7a,f: Short-term, construction -related effects on water quality caused by erosion and sedimentation. Effects on drainage patterns through conversion of existing undeveloped areas into developed, impervious areas. pollutants in western pond turtle aquatic habitat. 3.2c: Potential for runoff or accidental spills to increase turbidity and pollutants that could degrade riparian areas. 3.2e: Potential construction -related loss of trees meeting the definition of "protected tree" under the City's Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code. 3.3b, e: Potential for a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource in the plan area. Potential for the inadvertent discovery of buried human remains. 3.4a.ii: Exposure of people and property to seismic ground shaking. 3.4.iii: Exposure of people and property to seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction. 3.7b: Potential for illicit discharges to the stonnwater drainage system during construction dewatering activities if water is not properly stored and disposed of. 3.7c: Potential for future development to alter drainage courses and runoff patterns from existing conditions. Potential for plan area development to result in altered drainage patterns that could increase the potential for erosion, siltation, and associated adverse water quality effects on- or off-site. 3.7d,e: Potential for grading and soil disturbance for placement of new structures on-site to substantially alter drainage courses and runoff patterns from existing conditions and result in flooding on- or off-site. Net increase of impervious surfaces with implementation of the plan. 3.8a: Noise from existing and future traffic on roads surrounding and within the plan area. 3.8d: Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the plan area vicinity above levels existing without the proposed plan. 3.9a: Potential impacts on intersection operations in the plan area. For each of the above impacts, mitigation has been identified that that would lessen the significance to a less -than -significant level. Regarding these impacts, the City Council finds that changes have been required in, or incorporated into, the Draft Specific Plan, as described in the final EIR and summarized in Exhibit A, that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to less -than -significant levels. XII. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES Reasonable Range of Project Alternatives CEQA Guidelines § 15126(a) require that an EIR describe a reasonable range of alternatives that would obtain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental affects of the project and that the EIR evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Case law indicates that the lead agency has the discretion to determine how many alternatives constitute a reasonable range (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 566); and that an EIR need not present alternatives that are incompatible with fundamental project objectives (Save San Francisco Bay Association vs. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission (1992) 10 Cal.AppAth 908), CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(£) states that the range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a "rule of reason" that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. Feasibility of Project Alternatives Additionally, CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(a) provide that an EIR need not consider alternatives that are infeasible. CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(£)(1) provides that among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site. Alternatives Evaluated Based upon guidance contained in the CEQA Guidelines, the Draft EIR considered three alternatives to the proposed Proposed Plan: No Plan/No Development Alternative, No Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Alternative, and the Station Center Office and Residential Focus Alternative. Proposed Plan Objectives • Support the creation of a Downtown for Rohnert Park. Downtown should have the following features: — A distinct character building upon the community's existing assets (including redwood tree— lined streets, creek trail corridors, neighborhood sections with distinct centers, and rich cultural and recreational amenities). — A pedestrian -oriented development pattern, with a walkable street grid, a compact building footprint, and plenty of community open space. — A mix of uses, with emphasis on lifestyle and specialty retail, entertainment, urban -style living options, public spaces, and other transit -supportive uses (e.g., jobs, housing, and services). — A variety of public spaces to serve the community. ■ Take advantage of the transit -oriented opportunities adjacent to the Sonoma -Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) rail station to establish distinct subareas with unique community roles. • Focus growth within the one-half mile radius of the SMART rail station, as guided by the transit - oriented development objectives of the Priority Development Area, (PDA) Focusing Our Vision (FOCUS) program and regional guidance provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Station Area Planning Manual (MTC, 2007). The Station Area Planning Manual identifies Rohnert Park as a "Transit Town Center" place type, defined as a local -serving economic and community activity center offering a mix of single-family and multifamily housing and neighborhood serving retail, employment, and civic uses. • Create and reinforce a consistent urban design theme and identity for Central Rohnert Park and the Downtown District. • Support the transition of the Triangle Business subarea from primarily light industrial uses to a mixed-use business environment, with a mix of light office, light industrial, and more retail and service uses. • Support transit ridership by promoting new infill growth in the plan area, focused within the one- half -mile radius of the SMART rail station. * Plan for transportation improvements, including bus or other circulation opportunities and additional transit stops, to connect the community to SMART rail service and the plan area centers. • Support City General Plan Goals TR -I, TR -K, TR -L, and TR -R and Policies TR -24 -TR -34, TR - 41, and TR -42 to reduce traffic congestion by encouraging transportation demand management programs for businesses and workplaces and parking standards that help reduce automobile trips, and promoting alternative transportation modes. — Support safe and convenient transit, bicycle, and pedestrian travel modes and connections within the plan area. — Improve the safety of crossing the railroad tracks and roadways that serve as neighborhood barriers (i.e., the SMART rail line and Rohnert Park Expressway [RPX]). — Continue to improve creek corridors as major east -west travel routes, serving the community and support their future connections to the planned SMART Multi -Use Path (MUP). — Provide a safe and continuous bike and pedestrian trail network, integrated with transit and providing connections to and within the existing shopping centers, commercial areas, and employment centers. — Support investment in placemaking strategies, such as public plazas, sidewalk and landscape improvements, bike/pedestrian connections, and gateway and district wayfrnding signage. Analysis of Alternatives 1. Alternative 1: No Plan/No Development Alternative The No Plan/No Development Alternative assumes that growth would occur as allowed under the City's existing 2020 General Plan and Zoning. No land use changes or transportation facility improvements associated with the proposed plan would move forward. Instead, future development in the plan area would be subject to existing policies, regulations, and land use designations as per the existing 2020 General Plan. The No Plan/No Development Alternative would forego the opportunity to increase residential density or commercial retail and office intensity adjacent to the future SMART rail station for Rohnert Park. This alternative would allow for less residential and retail uses, particularly on the former State Farm property, and include more industrial uses. Finding: The City Council finds the No Plan Alternative infeasible and less desirable than the proposed plan and rejects this alternative for the following "[s]pecifrc economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations" which include benefits of the Proposed Plan that "make infeasible the... project alternatives identified in the Final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(3).) First, the No Plan Alternative would provide no significant advantage from an environmental standpoint over the proposed plan. The No Plan/No Development Alternative would have greater impacts to greenhouse gas emissions, when compared to the proposed plan. All other impacts would be slightly less, but the significant and unavoidable traffic impact would remain under the No Plan/No Development Alternative. Second, as explained below, the No Plan Alternative would not meet the Plan's objectives. • It would not support the creation of a Downtown and unique subareas within the central part of Rohnert Park. • It does not support transit, nor the transit -oriented development goals and advantages of having a SMART rail station, commuter rail line, and regional multi -use trail in the city. The 2020 General Plan was prepared before the SMART rail service was a reality. • It would not implement development standards and design guidelines that reflect the opportunities for a Downtown and transit -oriented uses, adjacent to the SMART rail station. • It would not provide the same level of transportation facility, multimodal, and connectivity improvements, identified in the proposed plan that ensures the safe access of all users. • It would not provide a framework for development of a cohesive system of pedestrian/bicycle connections and trails through the plan area linking activity nodes, retail, housing, parks, and open spaces. • It would not contribute to the sustainability objectives of the City. • It would not identify a framework for implementation and financing of the plan area. Third, the No Plan/No Development Alternative would require the City to forego project benefits (see generally Section XIV.D below for a discussion of project benefits.) Under the No Plan/No Development Alternative, the proposed plan would not contribute to the creation of an attractive Downtown environment and, because the development standards and design guidelines would not be implemented and the public improvements associated with the Plan would not be constructed. The City Council therefore rejects this alternative as infeasible within the meaning of CEQA. 2. Alternative 2: No Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Under Alternative 2, the regional commercial overlay zone, proposed on portions of the industrial zone that abut U.S. 101 in the Triangle Business subarea would be removed. Under this alternative, industrial uses would intensity, while retail uses would decrease from the proposed plan. The amount of office or public institutional uses, number of residential units, and amount of park and open space area, compared to the proposed plan would remain the same. Finding: Although the No Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Alternative would generally result in similar environmental impacts to the proposed plan, the City finds this alternative infeasible and less desirable than the proposed plan and rejects this alternative for the following "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations" which include benefits of the Plan that "make infeasible the... plan alternatives identified in the Final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091,subd.(a)(3).) First, the No Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Alternative would not meet the Plan's objectives to the same degree as the proposed plan. In particular, it does not meet the Plan objective to support the transition of the Triangle Business subarea from a primarily industrial area to a mixed-use business environment that is more pedestrian -friendly and well connected to the rest of the plan area. Second, the No Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Alternative would not provide the same degree of plan benefit, as the proposed plan, in teens of enhancing the economic development opportunities in the plan area. (See Section XIV.D below for a discussion of Plan benefits.) Under this alternative, the City would not receive as much tax revenue as from the proposed plan. The City Council therefore rejects this alternative as infeasible within the meaning of CEQA. 3. Alternative 3: Station Center Office and Residential Focus Alternative Alternative 3 would include the same proposed land use designations as the proposed plan and adjusts the land use concept proposed in the Station Center subarea. This alternative proposes less retail development and more office and high density residential uses in the Station Center subarea, near the future SMART rail station. Finding: While Alternative 3 would result in fewer environmental impacts than the proposed plan, the City finds this alternative infeasible and less desirable than the proposed plan and rejects this alternative for the following "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations" which include benefits of the Plan that "make infeasible the ... plan alternatives identified in the Final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(3).) First, Alternative 3 would not avoid the Significant and Unavoidable impacts of the proposed plan to transportation and traffic and only slightly reduces traffic . Second, Alternative 3 would deliver fewer of the Downtown retail and entertainment benefit, desired by the community and though it meets the majority of the plan's objective, does so to a lesser extent than the proposed plan. Thus, Alternative 3 does not provide the same degree of benefit as the proposed plan (See Section XIV.D below for a discussion of Plan benefits. Under this alternative, the City would not receive as much of the tax revenue as from the proposed plan and the public improvements associated with the proposed plan would not be constructed to the same degree because of a loss of some development impact fees needed to fund traffic or Downtown improvements. The City Council therefore rejects this alternative as infeasible within the meaning of CEQA. Environmentally Superior Alternative Sections 21002 and 21081 of CEQA require lead agencies to adopt feasible mitigation measures or a feasible environmentally superior alternative in order to substantially lessen or avoid otherwise significant adverse environmental effects, unless specific social or other conditions make such mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible. CEQA regulations prevent consideration of the "no plan/no development" alternative as the environmentally superior alternative. The EIR detennined that Alternative 3: Station Center Office and Residential Focus would be the environmentally superior alternative. Alternative 3 would not eliminate the unavoidable significant adverse transportation and traffic impacts identified for the proposed plan, under cumulative development scenarios and all the same mitigation required for the proposed plan also apply to Alternative 3. However, the EIR determined that Alternative 3 could provide specified benefits in that it would generate slightly fewer trips and associated traffic, air quality, GHG emissions, and noise impacts would be reduced as a result (although the traffic impact would remain significant). As discussed above, there are no feasible alternatives to the Plan that would avoid or substantially lessen the significant and unavoidable transporation and traffic impacts associated with the proposed plan. XIII. FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCEMENT Section 7.3 of the EIR provides an analysis of growth inducement effects of the proposed plan, as required by CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(d). In summary, CEQA requires a discussion of how a plan could increase population, employment, or housing growth in surrounding areas and consideration of the impacts resulting from this growth. CEQA Guidelines indicate that a plan would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would induce substantial growth or concentration of population. Section 7.3 of the EIR discusses the manner in which the proposed plan could contribute to or encourage such growth. Growth can be induced in a number of ways, such as through the elimination of obstacles to growth, through the stimulation of economic activity within the region, or through the establishment of policies or other precedents that directly or indirectly encourage additional growth. Induced growth would be considered a significant impact if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth would directly or indirectly have a significant effect on the environment. Finding: The proposed plan would directly generate population growth by providing housing for approximately 1,670 people and commercial retail and service, office, public -institutional, and industrial development that could generate approximately 1,900 jobs. Plan construction would generate jobs in the construction, materials fabrication, and supply industries up until the time of construction completion. The provision of construction jobs would create an indirect demand for local goods and services. Construction of the proposed plan is not expected to generate substantial population growth or new economic activity in the region because Plan construction would be expected to employ construction workers already living and working in the Bay Area. Construction of the Plan would include provision of new infrastructure for the Plan and its development components. This new infrastructure would lessen potential obstacles to growth, but is considered growth accommodating and not directly growth inducing. The Plan would be consistent with the City of Rohnert Park General Plan and would comply with the City's Growth Management Program, which ensures that the rate of population growth will not exceed the average annual growth rates established in the General Plan. The proposed plan would not construct infrastructure beyond that needed to serve the plan area and would develop at a pace that would ensure that public services would not be inhibited or overtaxed. The proposed plan would be consistent with City and County General Plan policies, regarding growth within the urban growth boundary and would not be expected to induce substantial growth outside this boundary. Explanation: The Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan would offer primary employment jobs as well as a range of temporary construction jobs. Overall, opportunities for population growth and employment provided by the Plan would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Growth Management Element goals and policies. The rate of job growth would be generally proportional to the rate of plan development anticipated under the City's Growth Management Program. Infrastructure would be constructed and sized to accommodate the proposed development and would therefore not be expected to induce substantial growth beyond that proposed by the Plan. The pace of growth associated with the proposed plan would align with the ability of utility and public service providers to adequately serve the plan area. XIV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed Plan against the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed Plan, and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures that would avoid or substantially lessen a significant impact. The City Council has also examined potentially feasible alternatives to the Plan, and determined that none are feasible. The City Council hereby adopts and snakes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Plan and the anticipated economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Plan. A. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Based on information contained in the record and in the FIR, the City Council has determined that the Plan would result in the following significant and unavoidable impacts as identified by the EIR: Impact # Description 3.9a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and nonmotorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to, intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Significant and Unavoidable Impact. B. Finding The City Council has considered all potentially feasible mitigation measures to substantially lessen or avoid the proposed plan's significant and unavoidable impacts. Where feasible, such mitigation measures have been adopted as part of the proposed plan. The imposition of these measures will reduce the identified impacts, but not to a less -than -significant level. The Council finds that it is not feasible to fully mitigate these Plan impacts. The City Council has also considered all potentially feasible alternatives to the proposed plan. The City Council finds that there are no feasible alternatives that would reduce the above significant and unavoidable impacts to a less -than -significant level. The Plan's impacts identified and discussed above therefore remain significant and unavoidable. C. Overriding Considerations After review of the entire administrative record, including, but not limited to, the Final EIR, the staff report, applicant submittals, and the oral and written testimony and evidence presented at public hearings, the City Council finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological and other anticipated benefits of the Plan outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts, and therefore justify the approval of the Plan notwithstanding the identified significant and unavoidable impacts (Pub. Resources Code, § 21081; CEQA Guidelines, § 15093.). The benefits are addressed in detail in Section XIV.D below. The City Council specifically adopts and snakes this Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging that this Plan has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible (including the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures), and finds that the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts of the Plan, which are identified above in Section XIV.A and described in Section XI, are acceptable because the benefits of the Plan set forth below in Section XIV.D outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts identified. The City Council finds that each of the overriding considerations expressed as benefits and set forth below in Section XIV.D constitutes a separate and independent ground for such a finding. Any one of the reasons for approval cited below is sufficient to justify approval of the proposed plan. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council will stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient by itself. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings and in the documents found in the Record of Proceedings, as defined in Section IV. D. Benefits of the Proposed Plan The City Council has considered the EIR, the public record of proceedings on the proposed plan and other written materials presented to and prepared by the City, as well as oral and written testimony received, and does hereby determine that implementation of the proposed plan as specifically provided in the proposed plan documents would result in the following substantial public benefits: 1. The proposed plan would generate sales and property tax revenues for the City. The sales generated by commercial components of the Plan will generate increased sales tax and property tax revenues for the City. These revenues would go to the City's GeneralFund, which is the primary funding source for the construction, operation and maintenance of a number of essential City services, programs and facilities including fire and police services, recreation programs, transit operations, library services, public infrastructure such as water and sanitary sewer service, and administrative functions, among other things. 2. The proposed plan would contribute to continued economic development, construction of roadway improvement, and maintenance of city services and facilities. The proposed plan will mitigate impacts to the following intersections within the Central Rohnert Park PDA plan area: Intersection I Improvements Commerce Boulevard/State Farm Drivef Signalize with SB left -turn protected phasing and WB right- turn overlap; add WB right -turn pocket. State Farm Drive/Professional Center Drive I Modify NB and SB from L -T -TR to L -TR. Intersection Improvements Commerce Boulevard/Padre Parkway Signalize with protected phasing NB/SB and permitted phasingEB/WB; modify NB from L -T -TR to L -T -R and SB from L -T -TR to L -TR State Farm Drive/City Center Drive Signalize with protected phasing NB/SB and permitted phasingEB/WB; modify NB from L -T -TR to L -T -R RPX/Commerce Boulevard Convert Commerce Boulevard to protected phasing and add NB right -turn overlap; modify SB from L -LT -T -R to L -T -T -R; add bulbout NW corner; extend EB left lanes to 350 feet and WB left lane to 225 feet. RPX/State Farm Drive Convert State Farm Drive to protected phasing; add right - turn overlaps all approaches; modify SB from L -LT -R to L -L -T -R and NB from L-LT-T-Rto L -L -T -R. Enterprise Drive/Hunter Drive Convert EB from LT -TR to L -TR and WB from LT -TR to LT -R. Enterprise Drive/State Farm Drive Signalize with two-phase operation; modify WB from T -TR to T -R. State Farm Drive/Town Center Signalize with protected phasing NB/SB and permitted phasingEB/WB; modify NB and SB from L -T -TR to L- TR; modify EB/WB from LTRto LT -R. RPX/Lynne Conde Way Add protected pedestrian crossing on RPX (pedestrian signal or HAWK signal); continue to restrict side street movements to right turns onloff of RPX. RPX/SMART multi -use path Add protected pedestrian crossing on RPX (pedestrian signal or HAWK signal). Notes: EB = eastbound; NB = northbound; RPX = Rohnert Park Expressway; SB = southbound; WB =westbound L = left -turn lane; R = right -turn lane; T = through lane; lanes shown as grouped (example: L -T -TR is a 3 -lane approach with one left -tum lane, one through lane, and a shared through -right -turn lane). Source: AECOM, 2015 Future projects within the Plan area will also be subject to the payment of fees to provide for and maintain public infrastructure such as Public Facilities Financing Plan fees to help fund off-site improvements, City-wide and Regional Traffic fees, Pavement Maintenance fees, Public Services Impact fees, and Maintenance of On -Site Infrastructure fees. The public improvements will be funded and maintained through a funding mechanism such as a community facilities district. These fees and funding mechanisms would be described in future Development Agreements. 3. The plan will support the creation of a downtown for Rohnert Park. The proposed paln will create a distinct character that embraces the community's existing assets (including redwood tree—lined streets, creek trail corridors, neighborhood sections with distinct centers, and rich cultural and recreational amenities), including: — A pedestrian -oriented development pattern, with a walkable street grid, a compact building footprint, and plenty of community open space; — A mix of uses, with emphasis on lifestyle and specialty retail, entertainment, urban -style living options, public spaces, and other transit -supportive uses (e.g., jobs, housing, and retail); — A variety of public spaces to serve the community. 4. The Plan would take advantage of the transit -oriented opportunities adjacent to the SMART rail station to establish distinct subareas with unique community roles. The proposed plan will focus growth around the one-half mile radius of the SMART rail station, as guided by the transit -oriented development objectives of the PDA Plan as a local -serving economic and community activity center with a mix of single-family and multifamily housing and both neighborhood and regional serving retail, employment, and civic uses. 5. The Plan would create and reinforce a consistent urban design theme and identity for Central Rohnert Park and the Downtown district, thereby contributing to the quality and success of Central Rohnert Park. The proposed plan would lead to: — Transition of the Triangle Business subarea from primarily light industrial uses to a mixed-use business environment, with a mix of light office, light industrial, and more retail and service uses; — Increased transit ridership by promoting new infill growth in the plan area, focused within the one -half -mile radius of the SMART rail station; — Transportation improvements, including bus or other circulation opportunities and additional transit stops, to connect the community to SMART rail service and the plan area centers; — Reduced traffic congestion by encouraging transportation demand management programs for businesses and workplaces and parking standards that help reduce automobile trips, and promoting alternative transportation modes; — Safe and convenient transit, bicycle, and pedestrian travel modes and connections within the plan area; — Improved safety of railroad crossings and roadways that serve as neighborhood barriers; — Improvements to creek corridors as major east -west travel routes serving the community and support their future connections to the planned SMART station; — A safe and continuous bike and pedestrian trail network, integrated with transit and providing connections to and within the existing shopping centers, commercial areas, and employment centers; and — Investment in public amenities such as public plazas, sidewalk and landscape improvements, bike/pedestrian connections, and gateway and district wayfinding signage. E. Determination and Adoption of Statement of Overriding Considerations The City Council has weighed the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed plan, as set forth above in Section XIV.D, against the significant unavoidable impacts of the proposed plan identified in the EIR (and identified above in Section XIV.A). The City Council hereby determines that those benefits outweigh the risks and adverse environmental impacts of the Plan, and further determines that the Plan's significant unavoidable impacts are acceptable. Accordingly, the City Council adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations, recognizing that significant unavoidable impacts will result from implementation of the proposed plan. Having (i) adopted all feasible mitigation measures, as discussed in the EIR; (ii) rejected alternatives to the proposed plan, as discussed in the EIR; and (iii) recognized the significant unavoidable impacts of the proposed plan, the City Council hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the proposed plan, as stated herein, is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of the proposed plan and outweighs and overrides its significant unavoidable impacts, and thereby justifies the approval of the proposed plan. EXHIBIT D SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Table 1 displays a summary of potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures that would avoid, eliminate, minimize, or reduce potential impacts. The level of significance of the potential impact prior to and following implementation of each mitigation measure is identified. For detailed descriptions of project impacts and the effect of implementation of mitigation measures on such impacts, please see the EIR. 4) M a II a N � o V }' V .w bA � bA U U cd U N w o 3 o O y bA Q O cn =1 y N 0 cd (4cn -,_ c* cd O� N cd n O w (47, 'd O N U Y N b4 cd O N O bA N O� b J v p cpi ; bWq bq O.° 3 a� 0 Cd p cqj c .our N o �� . •� ' o >, '� b ° �� N � a � cd j Cd . s~ .� Ln 11) CO cn 1-4 Cd ° ~ O Cd Cd �y �Q cid 0 O X N i� s bA • v U cd C,¢ ^� N p N Q O p O U O .y Li N rn UIn by _ N U 00 b Y S O Y b L b CA W 1, �+ 4 cd ° U U cd /U �O p 'd p v O N O = p, b i 4 i =" O cd o0 '—' cd t Q. • ro N !�• O O p �� Go N'� pq O O C� cyd N Ei U C/1 u C�l i;, O U ' •. U O T� • • • • • O 0 U C1 C V yO V] V] y � + O 'cC `..t 0 O Y .Ur N cd Cd v N y C. N O Cd '� Cd Q•I O Y F1 U U CO 4, o a p (4� O 4� Y _ ° N U cd a, Cd Cd H 4) M a II a N 0 r; d F b cd O O 7Ua b 00 'cl o s. . Li c+•� N r-•1 '-' 7-1 i-wl � . U . id cd U U N f O O" cd N y bUA a o off 3 x C)ID W a ani � � � .� �' � p •y -fl A. o a,'� to cd U N N N O bA y O U co b En cd -TJ ' > �'' � Q o v C U Ly U N �+•1 y O i••i N p .�-i O N �.. p. id '�• O ¢' 7s U 3 d a co 0 T w �n m � o cd ,� C'J4] �+ cn 44 'y cd °" 3 0 cd y•° cd ° b ,� oq •u) C4 vii � � � � • ° C4 O♦ � rn �� U 0 C y � A R � cd N cn cd N •i �� U ` �ry i. •., X_ i O 'rCi X b yah rO, y a..l •y ~ O U N iii' -411 id O cd O 4••Q� p 1.4 W5wn0V VJ Cd i -I V 1 cd � z O U � Z o O 3-4 ��• .O" � 4.• (, b 0 4) � O i•V Qi a� ..yU4 N � O ,cyd 0 • ^1 Y ..-4 . H +-I � 4•d ^y (d a� � � Q% }w+ f"4 Y4 � 'i4•I w U Q+ '� O 0,, b N p U O . N Q y bA b U � � O b 1+ � y � O N O Q �' � bA � cd � a) • � ° � � U U � •+•d bA � bA ry "d F �1 'b F cy O N cd} N O .d y > cd U s4 0 b N + O O N cd ' U 'd cd U ° v) s � p � � � a � b .9 � k •N y0 O N > �D p wO' fl m � � � CO N O d N 4) 444 N 4U. �O N O Q4 U p W 'C O n n cYd 0 c Vl CC 'b N r•'' Wco 0 pvUi � oo G44 C7 U 0 ° , O U N ,•• 4 ' N 4) y4 > y 4] 0 p co cd N b O O N ,, o �o U)a ' r. 0 p Cd ° y as yon °�' � " � a ami C, ° a ern 5 a -a �� Ctl O O v a0 ali 4 N • ■ • • •L—�i � � /—' CQ � LU", tom. � � ren . `a' � � � 4� O t7 O y c'•' M as L3, E D C a H y U im. J I� py cd P* W O 7 �r4 PC c0 H w �n m ea .� aio s. d' U 7:1 O Otom". y W-0 m x4 >�. ID O b ' N° u Q DOC O N p cid t >~ C7 in 3 b �+ cd rn _ O p+ O O ' �' R" +0.,+ O (1) O cn m cd U O cd O ani TJ 'O � coy. O p 4 cd ani Cd N ° U •� 0 ,--i N 4-4 � cd U p � �"' N � a+ � N U > .s."y rn •F+ N N N ° O y V] N .t'y fn N �' O 'b 's: U ° bA U N O N r� ,�' l+.� �' ',"' Vl i.y +•., Gi 'G 'd o , �+ `*-' ' o oo O oo b ° LOi O cd pp N 0 O °.U'l a � > U+ Otwo Sti" .y U N114 G A 4--i • U ,5,1 �'S N, � _ O � �'y ,,,� O rn cd r'.• .b N _N c6 v� O O" A.� _ � � � 3 A, O m cd O i v� O p •-+-y MOM C O cd U 4� •y a O c ww a ul tj a� 04 W H Cj Cj a +� U � a C w w O ct� a� c� U bD iz Ti bA coo Cd 0 u cn a L � o K � bA U �+ U � W I,, Gn y O to N rid C', z C CL) y cd? a4 d cn N Q. y 0 3 cd r. cd C° O A o Cdco 0 � o y o co cl 71 Cd P d •> a) b .0 c� � w o �` U c o 0 ct. a' o , p O s. U O cd cd ., O N N U e u . .� z�.• a O G." cd O rA cd '42d b� UO Q O o'�� b y �� ~ osto�o��AQyv'�� '� Q. p ani Cj �w to O a� N U E U N sy t". i'y U Cdun o 8 r �' �" b ai Y w Y cd ami vm, ez i ul cd � WDO U m "d O p N O 'n ❑�❑ 'C N id N " 'b �, �+0. b N �� y0 N U ,b O r'.y p yo O v N cd 4., A O iC O W Qt bq cd N O �, O p cd O �p U N Q N� CL > N-0 O .y ,� cd 0 � N O cid- y O U •b N cd U ,� p bA 'C7 V cd cd . O .U. O i� Q N cd ' Q, O cy ^� Q, K 0m bo N s va N czcd �" CC d c O o +�� 6d ,i bA cC H cd v� w rn 7•. co pD lw y m Lf, u C" a H un U Cd w 0 u F bA coo Cd 0 u cn a L Ti H a u +� A a�ab "' C� o �. o on >, �. a, o .? o w a . as U ns <. 4.1o ai � bn C) 0u O- z v- q a' �? s p O N o d b o b 3 L7 1.0 oar �� •� � •� �-� U ��©°� U -� y U N O N Q O V'1 .O bn •�-+ on �3 '?— •e"v '( ' Q H �-+ N fn N -g y 6?�•� N ,rwF=, VJ 1199 i,i Q.i 9] C!J ro y0 •� u ^ V p U cd O O U O 00 U P b} y0 v p bn b y 0 O 4 b �" ^� yCO r GO 4" N p � ty N S� O Q° °'� bA -" � . O+1 '" � V .eZ pv, [ r � E7 � . ; .� 2 O Q i ° a`�i o d iii " p 04 p Ld Lr � � ❑ 4-1 .,•I � �' U /Q�) � , � O i y -1 • y id O O J, �'n :7 ^�Q{ ��1/ U U V [] a on O �1 q. q N O � sy 0 ono . d o bD w �, W 0 04 Cj Cd = 40. "y 03 ^ �+ 17 W r.+ E� a a 0 a� r. Fy Ti H a E rJ L AMM wCdm •0.0 tO W) M AMM m 5m co O O O a w O a �a CIO a a� U °J oA i 'o O s, �0 � 0 0 ° ��¢ d .gib ; ��`° ro cd U cd b O N 110) loll W o -I F. � 1+ U O n cd f". b O N MMMCU �x 0_ ""3��0/ �(D � U sN. ��.' iL cid sU•i � LU., � X.5;" H A q mw ti � U V O U O O O O q O O cd bA cd a�y O �" o a �a CIO a m 00 a� O s, 110) loll f". b O N OU � rn � 4�i � U sN. ��.' iL cid sU•i � LU., � X.5;" N O a�y O �" o U z cd O cd cd cao)n .° `n cn 'A N O b 'k a� 3 .0 ... Nch ,b o ~o C7 bb ° 0 �" ° N U 0 U Q 0 v U 0 v v O N 0 d �,� O d O 0 U U 0 0 U cqjX c+-i U, m> O N id N id O '+-¢' • cd �+ id .b'+� cn • Cd Q ~ i• -I �-- O U> N H cn m M M M m 00 H a ci � •o bA U O � b b U •b ��• (� M Y CC Y Qi k--1 ° O 1.4 h b s'y ° V% • • •Y••i ° O .1-i ' i••I �_ Y cC �• y •Y U Cd • ~ ° Sy a i -I rl ° o U mCC,, 00 10 N i-1 /� Cts •�-I 0° o V C% a c U °; a( C) v� o Qtcj `� _� _p. Cdaki ro ? coo 0 o °' Cd' U ° d cn w aoo°b daw 'm Qc-,Gc° WD BU bs� q� En 00 M �'.� �'ZI b a� W o °fin'^ ° d "' C° y U M ° U � ••4) to ° U �i•i id 4% •y Y -d Vi a� � U fn G� �T ° E -I i'•i �+ fn V] Qi •0 IiZ�1 m %1 O � 0 U ° — L� U Y � ��44 -H hn M In � O 'C W • � V] � U •Y R td � �.y Cd C� � � �•" U � '+� 1^ OL= O H b � ,� > ed m co ^y�� -S G Y V }�yy 9C }Oy U o a El }Cyy� cj yy � 0 FJ i 1•y • r EC bD •y ° N U •Q•I cd t �"'� 4- �y ., 0 U co & " 1•i • Q ° b _ •° o �• > CQ U > Cj 4 3 • 11 At V •� O w. W v� p.1 d a cd g a b �. v cd o O V O u w 41 aio a o~ H rA a +� as -4 Cd a o� Cd eded H H a V CIO u s m O q � o q � C� COO q H a bA � V1 w clip U ~ Y N N LiU U N O° U N > O 'd Go� Q 0w CO 0 Q d 0 cd co rA d y y o o q" O O y U U N -C d� I GO o -n is �.��y+ '~ b °' �° °oU) ' °� ° o " Q ° b � cd°��° U aEn Q 2 V7 � Fj 04 h . `�' 0.)'D� fd 0' q % Sr "C 'n �w o� ��b a a� add a W' a d E in °'0 0 q co v r. au ' � 'C do W cd a� ✓� p a� o o on 0 sU 63 Q /a� oA o g o U d 0a�� cd 4-1 0 cn En b,d a Cd U a � U �'+ � � � o a 0y ° � �° , , U Q G H ° C'so d � a � � C7 N N O ro $ •°; d 4-i 3 o cd (L) �� d = o Eb�7 N b � c— o O 5� V O •� +�yyW 'b F4 CiN W .. E w cd '� b a > O G q . O +... Ln d >, li•-1 A ffi Id V] �11- 30.ao kw� cqj i �'�a�a �a.o.� Sao ° O N o y N ' Q' �, O w O v O� d • • .� U +. �, > o GG a pa d LE cd PG o Q, w 0 v q q o o o a C*O rA a� c. C A a, o i o u U CO Vi cd O i. a o 0 a a 4o _ " � s�e cn a, FA o V CIO u s m O cu 9b CID a m a ....................... . � •o � rU•` cd ' "Z) co0 C,3 41 cz to Q U d O .. O Q, cd bA s0, cd Encd . UU ci i4 Icqj 10 O En N O V d Sc�y.y r°U 0 3 a a d o o u o w c O o y U 'cl ,r. v U ° c� O O U �+ .a N i x b� _O +O •O �N n 0., 0 C O .d d v .d ro °cqj o 'd m ch 1•q o Os y 3c ) ''oa -is°m 'ti 'cd $0o y.a Y° " m 0o � " 0ao o b y 00 U w Cd >x oU �w > > ..O U N b N En 0 C13 co �°^ O. O o O id ai 'C y..I o .d O b > b ,..Ia¢i '� 0env a id a A o 3 v ro o Q 1 IV w on ° t . � , Cd° ' s'" o an M V W �� o P, , 0 N o m �a,aCd�c. - rn p o 0 o y C ^" o = w bA 0n Cl, C� U E.y r y U O Cd U a rn c ao cd U cj O P4 QI � _Q � Rt N N cu 9b CID a m \ Q / C14 Q) rA a � o C." bA Hl l 'C cd C)03 b bA i cd U — 6, ° ul •O O O 4r y "b rn 4. ld > O cd Jcl v, a� ro > a O .°? cdA ami co o cd°' cd cd '�' U L�-, cd �' a� a� ° a� 42 cd Cd 'C 4w V1 CA Ed -0y 'i� cd OSI 3-1 Iy� b W iw g ° (% �" r��I i/"I� fn •Y L." a fn (d �i �-I U �-I •O ,y ' U f+ yU,, • 1-I O to (d 0 I-+ lc� cdfO co ° •� •,O Vj bA 0 ISI •U y err 0 � •d � N � . •S_; � 0 CAO •bA y cc C cd O U n.d ~ m id ami cd M N r.+ M N O WD yEn rn r M i�.l N A O U-0 ciduP4 P, M M i-4 Y i -I yam,.,{, coy �yCJ h•I •I•�M y1 y --1 (/J •ti ti (d i-4 Cfy Hyl Cd id 4ich Cl) t1 '� d d O O U n b O Cd U O°cd o Cd 3 v U N +o O �"• O ° b w ) U x �., ccd N 4 i N O p O$ F Fr bA �' 6o O O ry) �" syr bA yy. O o o ¢ 3 o 0 00 *" 0 u q O o y w C* V)V) W � y ° it bl) U ca W) m CJ 0 n • N o. o~ Ung Gn p 40 cd U 'd1.01 '+ EC N 0 o a� a H Q) rA m V p ee oA t CIO F4 q a � w d o ro 3� (j o too • 7:1�� y U cz ' cd p u U .G CO Q., ci Cd GL U o y ,U 1.0 y O cd N p N O U o q b fr" N O cd n O� bA CJ U cd + L7 co 4a O � O 'b �I eq o O x U OU `^ b.A 0. 5 '� p" �' 'D Cis Cd U 0 N N �bA 4.;z syr' ' �° Y A U o° d bA 'b v U U O cqj o v api w 0 o F' U o 3a; a b q ° b �' -d (1). ° aoU CIO' v q � U40. C CA bb a� C yy N Q d o U a c o �U a Ui fd r d a. ro o 0o o _ �. 03 3ctj� Cd —Cd U N N N KI M i m V U w~ 9b m E-� cn a O O 'C cd N cOd N bq • I~ '.., o � � `�+ 'b OV p 0s b bA 3 cd N �- N bA N N p. cd o N n C) (L) cd .y O chi °O pp ro U vi U b N N S"j E y Cd cz na� O ��oy b y� 3 sem. cd B°o ~ � nNai o onUy11 In o O 0.9 ° r .d - bro� 0= 2 N -C °'Ocn � �. co)w o ° o GCdro ° " ' ani �. bq •,_ O id u s, a C) '>~ (L) , p.... p Cd Cd a� r Cd Ln N U ' bq N 4-•t-" N O Q. • 0 bA N O �.. .y cd >�." too o U)y a°i toy b o .b °s. ami o O Cd 'n b . ' c°,. � °' fix O Cd > o alio ito z •r. O b a . U b O c� cd c W Z N 0 O .> Orn U) N O so. qty (". . ti O N O y cyd .�.� }' cd U)cd m O o O d N N ,-c�0 U N N rn U s. U N n �. v t cd CL, b v 0 b �r.1 M U w 9b a J2 b O Cd rl" b C a[ri� W cn u V) a a � o U � ii U � � N r -I 1 Y • "� H � Y . O � � >•1 "d s-. G". cd N cd O (C • O bA ' -cd 00 Cd ao0 3 o °�' > a r-° W cl > U -d � N a� a� to -- an 0 O � � y V 1••��11 C's0 ~ '"� O Y fn byp � �y '1 ti lil V Y (d ,l b i••1 +: Cpy O O b cd O cd cd O b 'U y N O Cd, r/1 0 .O N a� b 3 4. oo Q) `� � a+ cd 6, 0 'n w `d 3 -d cd En cd °' ° Cd o 8 n m cdto A :b a o ° x F v a� 4. 0° C 'nani :d !+� 0 p U U I� 0 v C0JYN " U cd 'Npr -O0 ; bU cyUN iw d P4 .. ��j °I .d 0 O r ° MM cu b 0 H R! id N p ° N cd m> O N bA s. Y cd °Y' 3 Cd b U d o Y &M a O En d x U r. oani Q. a� cd b• O N° F" WD i Cd Y ✓'' %ti Y Y• b c N O O O� O b N N C b�' D N Q% Cd fy' S-1 N ° ° I�1 U U N y .Uy f.�"� . i 1 cqj ;:sY S-� +""i O Cd O cz S .S.' U 'Yr" uo Lr 2. (a CI] �--1 �"i 1•n o O O � b a+ o H a V O Cd a� [� M J2 b O Cd rl" b C a[ri� W cn u V) a 1 Tw 00 H to ami Cd a� aC,j 03 U) � 1y IbOf'1-. ° 0 0y 0 W Y cv y sS on 4m. -i SS � - C'j f~O C cd cd ' bq cd O N . O N p > al � co ¢ •U � � 'y � Cd 0.) � o � •� CJ � 'b ani Cd � .� CJ °'8)'yOa N ' b y N �+ C scd y O cd cd W p C m' p U U � cd • � CL, N N O A. cd .b y O O Y p0 'Cy . y N cd N yN .-� rn p >~ cd OA c� cd 'o O n cd ✓1IJ— E Ca C , q +rte 1. CYN) SSI to �Oy YO Y �� N 4- cd y.y U U fd cl.i �.. u cqj 3 N N �' N �••� .0 ' N ' N iQ"G Y. O O .0 O �" ,SOJ Y bA 9 cd v� v N n rn n bD n SSI C> > n s. . CIS o a 'C O by U O Y N SS, O .b N O N O N SSI ' �1d W � ro M 1 Tw 00 U �+ U c J Cd b;>,� Y N En N O U U 4-.P3 > p O `n `) �Uy p �. •p O(D V "�� O •N in, O bA N by cUd U ¢ = on o U O M M M M CIS U U O O, ) N O N y N N . 0 N bq O ,b O 'C O 4' O O O O U �y N cd top. cpi m cl, ,o 0 4* O u b p O y O U O 0 V] a V] a U) a V] as Cd O 'O W cd 0y 0 b A (~ � 4.4 O V O .� O O O O y cl O— O O O o p U C N N W bA P, W U ti W '�� dCd U 6 F M M M M W) a� W co A. M 0 N (U g, Ln 9b ce O a II a I, m q � o q � H S4 Q N cd �.• CO yX. ° 41 N Q O y° o i H s��, �-" b4w y Q o a U° �' o q q U O • 0M 0 'i.N w` F (� .•.•I VV) V a Cl, N 1.0 cn w 13 ° rx� .o Y� A. r}�y� U) i-I ii O y • (d O y V) �i (� CQ V44. WD V U d y ' 'd fd �1 H ° Ci y VI liyl (d � E0.�i 7) O . O .ro a° y y O O m O a q U U b-0 (41 o o "� N y U y 4r 4 ° > v U _ O ° p" co v? u M U �U ' y y L. N Cl) cd cd o ° +' cd A o 'd a P� . ° o W .d yS%4 +'a •'y-I �4 O F•�I �+-I 0 y 'O �bl�y P. 0, o w p. ani CJ 0 fi 4~ o - u q o ° ~ o 4. v� � � U Lw O � }' bq u c cd q ' a •� w o 00 o x � b a� (U g, Ln 9b ce O a II a I, m _..._......_ y a� ,d 0 N a� Abp N N ° >U 4w O Ak O Cd 7. O cdsem. vUi O O -d p O O O Cd .� U O bn 0 gto n � N � � � N .O � U � � N � 'd ° .� � •O N cd � L".L". Q �O p U O v2 N O cC cC Cd cd ,S y Cd 6c 44 CO N O Q cd O Cd to (41 o on cd • q o w " C7 cid o o Q b , wo0 U) m ani on a o uGo °cn' w ani • a �, • � � ani '� � ,�o O i � � � > � ° � ° ° x o 'd 0 0 -d ° o s� 3 s~ o w > O0 Cd O U N M 11. N N a _ a .b Uj y 'd w _ Y �•i Q� d p co o o H o co ro W° o rn 0 o �o Z ¢ 0 0 o U ami b a°i ca p. o ro a a a o b a� •y o CA � "' v' U y >, cd m_. p V �_ � x C cd � id ° Q m 0 "" r"' Q " Q � > O cd N N b4 O +' �; r a� O cd N U cd 3 CA Cd Cj o60 Cd cd cS ocd C In wn a a� b o w m o d ��" Pr � b � ° 0 � •� � 3 ani • � � mbA U y aUi ap blp a +� o A y Q p d w C7 a s, a a _U �; �1 W Q v°� c ii 4- cd a 0 cd Cf) a � •o 40, a a CG 4i °" o 4 N cn y U O •� U '� O U cd .ten. • .�. O C� Q O v� C"" U F. U b N O 00 NCd cn �. U 4y Q. 0 cd y Ow ccl "^ to °� p n N cd 4 cd a bA U U N N U N .° C b CMMS O Cdd U cdd 4� 4w Uj .r. b y O y y ¢i �a� Cd 0 0 0o -d r. r; C7 c ss 0 xi O o p. ° a" a� H M cf, 6 m 9b N q _ � o q � U � � C/] W d' i cd N cl O OU Q o Cd C cn O V z cd d O rn 7C U y Oj cl • Uij +- rn yy O }y i4 �' Qi V FI y 'b . ti Y q y O b U a v� -0 El U cd m is o U 'cd d 3 b o cd �' r, �o `� " 3 'd b b '" y W U pp ca P. ¢, .� i. b W �� ' � a� � id ,��, cUd ON o y ca o o ¢ m cd3 acts ch .r U U cn 0 cd u)-. czci co cd 0 O O U U 4 ti «f P-1 U cd O a� on d d F+ o° a v c� >: W cd a ro c� q o O y o U o ca v� aib x d 0 U r 7 N p O" A u), —O cd w OCd U N c's cd Pr u) d > j O cc" +' ca N c q O ai 0 P., O ff, cd .G C� F 6 m 9b N a) �n U7 m q U }' q � C� u � CIO q a w d O O C4;11 0 .R N o i�-1 LA In 0 � pV V M U W N N O b 0 Ln cd 'C Cd V cd ce CO Crv'1 pp OU O N O O U).� cd pq ,..� O O > U -Y N N Y 4--i C,13 cli p N Y iti Lon tg C, u o oo1 anEn (d cl,Y 0 •�I q o 3 0 -d cd cd P. * O u q q y O o u coo ca vo UU O N p QA u 'Y O71 :4 U O b cVd 0-0 o. c 3 u N Cd U O O 4-i ti E� ri a) �n U7 m P� r! Cd a w 0 Rs a h ?j N ,.b,••U� � w � b F••i �y z b ' C) b°n, 3 ° ro o p.0 O cqj o En En •�, U y0„ U cd cd b O N U 3 y 0 0 -fidp" � cdCj N N cd N Oma''. Cd ' in 1 .Y cd N Uto ' V IJ o N L: a� r. cz Q 'b o bU U N o (cd 1) o 3 o O .� O 0 tom O 0 N N cd U Q _N N ro o o cd o -d (� °- N �y O Q Uri i N �1 m � •o u +� w d� COcli 'A d O ¢, U� 0 �i bA cyd 'C N +�-' Uf. UU � O cd 0U � cd� :� w � is •.N. � .� ¢, y:., � bD � � oo w � > � " ° c>~ sa a• y a '� o U E a 3 oo �; b °c .u,� N W U u bA U O Ou b Z0bnb- N q N 1. _ 0 cd c, En o In, cd a o 43 a� cd p. o bA U N cd pq d N ¢, U 6. N", cd •�~ V Cw" O 0 cd � F+ O u ~ ~ 4~ a a an QdU a. ° o a 0 > 3 a°b > o on ° o O ° U > H 0 Y �. y co ° ' c°no 0 M U >? ro to o t o b w> ami y cid ° wcno cd 0 to0 cd 0 U •� y � ,C�, j O �b H cri 00 N U � U Q �r. Cd N N N � N r •y M M U � M U co cd cd Cd y Q b b ti N N cu w O U F, o p y o u o w a. a a a, a im� a a� V) a� •Y 1,4 O Y yU„i icy cU/i +U' G% 4� UO U 2 N V cO cd EI O ¢, O Gci O o + (U•d o , U > -d • ^ N Cd N U) U U cd Y� P4 is N b p u :� 2:' bD s� a> '. 4-4 � cd Ln LW p P, cd �j o CM • Y O O Cd Cj O L"i 0 V] 4� �y V] 4� Cd 4� 4� Y O Cj V1O O O �� O b O — Cd a U U a co a, co a u, . P, 41 z E� Mi ri q � o v � q � d 2 0 b a� o En Cd 00 Cd v, a—Cd a 0 `i' R' a' W b �; 0«f N 0 + -Cd 0 , Ps 0. p a� o b' p e� G } N N b 7 b 4) ;z, +-d o � H �? 20, 4. co co y cd cd 0 000NM 04 �3U O W � (1)'" b o " b CA 0 w> 0 0 ccd U cyd - 0 y .� O U ° U O y 1' Q v 3 > y id v n -� . C) 0En .0 Fes- U cd o 4m ° o b ° e`en " �' '�' oo 0Cd U�a os oaf 40 v q 0 q y O O W V] a a 0 co 00 M Cd �b m Ai p a� p to F- cz y a--+ • ~ C7\ C CO y a? 10 cd 0 Cd CJ u b O va O U O bb V cd cd b � O a N U G v 4� O a0i y Vi �+ Cd O cd N bq N �y w "� O ap • �+ v� Cy U U N O N O Q ,y W W O O a-+ �"i ; U,y $nI cd U bA pp QO ¢ bA N p — O = k h Fs ,o —Fl +--� a� O cC ¢ ° r 0 O n ff" O p U cn cd h9 p .O U N�'� y H C) ro 0 � U) r. N M a) r0 /N •Y O U �"� O i-1 N •r.y .JL4 � •YY � � � ¢I lV .� •y � •� � U �i-y H a M - U _ — — — a o ami cdG rte/] UO Cc) ami V] O Z U p p o F W O y 4w0 a a �' 0 ° y a 0 cod Cd C•' °�' o Cd 4w o Q y ' °o. �, Cd �1 > o o 6 00 o rn H M M M Ai EXHIBIT D SUMMARY OF ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Table 1 displays a summary of potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures that would avoid, eliminate, minimize, or reduce potential impacts. The level of significance of the potential impact prior to and following implementation of each mitigation measure is identified. For detailed descriptions of project impacts and the effect of implementation of mitigation measures on such impacts, please see the EIR. V] a U7 a a Cd Cd o> +- y U � o 3 P4 o o 0"b C1 O ^ c O O 4. O O ^ cd Or. c`nd U O -�y— e O cid O O v0 V C bA En 3=b o O N [~ Cd O 0 °y' >= . cd C v ti to > x -0 '� F N O C O' ,� En fl U .N c Q O O U O +� X cd Cd CL �'N•Ccd ° 0 y v al cm O .— y O O ccd� n G rn O N Q. ~ m 0 0. cid U t. UO 00 coyN 00,— vOi N cd 'It N Q O axi 3 +, '> �' ami b O O bA o N FU. a� o E 'b v 2b ami i C L. • • • o >~ Oc -0 °° 0 C q C.) 3 °Q 0 U U ' C4 ° b ^ O U Cd = C 0 cd E O U E V] a U7 a a Cd Cd +- y O � >~ a cd Or. c`nd U O -�y— e O cid O O p O cn �- d O bA En 3=b o O N [~ Cd O O o 0° U °y' >= . cd C v ti to > x -0 '� N o O 0 bA cd s. C Cd s. ,� En fl O 'C ti O O U O +� X cd Cd d 0 O :'• ° 0 y v al cm O .— y O O N ^� + w rn O N Q. P. sem, 00 oO cd 'It > ° axi 3 +, '> �' ami b O O '� bq • E 'o •-- k +� o 3 3 d b U v� ami i i • • • Irl f N N ►5 e c CA >1 a� ° U O NEn O 00 1j � 4cd (A O cd N N ^ .D O O cOd N 'O .�C bb UU O H 3 d c. ++ t; d cd L]. 3 O O O C o ani c = -=a (1) o Cd Q O- •Q O n d Y U U C14a 0 in En °nom 3 cd U U N O bD O C U Cd O d N y c _ O -O N b cd in. .It .. bA cd Ucd =s 0 N O n Gl .0 cOd 0 cd , O .bnU U p O N -E ¢ cOd E O CL C ^ o o -d O un C' >, O b cd U U d O"� m +r d O O n N �; . A N N r. tU. L e�j O d cd O W p U N Uam) cd U' 0 vOi M U U N" n O O +�' �� E O U O v� C"• N cd +� O v,+ O O y > = bA +, M in L." cn cd " U �, O N O U 0. - M OO cn O ^O a cd N O .., p N O U fl Q O r cd b cd N 3 U 4� O p 00 .. f. O ch Cd > 0-o cr ° . ° a . Q.-6 esu '� To M E5 0 P E C _U CC H cd ^� co� O C N 0 cd ®,tko t0„ O O cd N 4. � � � .� � O >~ U s0, p U O cd N O 00 U bb ^ Cd O � v a> . �' ° o C C ai v, o.cd a Cd U bA C U CO y 'O EnCo 0 Cd o o� Cr- d x U �? C .d a� ° =� 6 E U �+ V10 —Cd° N b X C N N cd O y b •- — U >? Z U c'Cd y O -O '^ 7 y V �' N O to +In - O Ocn 464, C C cql v d CO C a0i E p° s°. s0. -o 0 M bCn W+L cid NEA U -o ¢ N N •Y �bo °W5`O o r. En O-0 SA ebb SO E 0° CJ o> oas~ N o -o ^dcn FA > cd `d o o ;� >' cd C 0 ca li., o a ai o o ° °- ° �' o nn •— � -0 3 ' 3 ' E— a� � � d E �. a� O CtlC .b Cd U bC�n II Qn U bn 0 u cn .a E a i OO N >> cn (1) _ y N N m O V N= O 3 '� p, C'sO _� O .0 R. cd 4 c� cd O N b -0c+-d cd O >> N n In 'O 4° O cid U N N ° cd ct > 1.. ^" U U bA U ' O ^p Cd `n p cd d o o'er id^_•o. ^ '-0-" 0 E c`�i �p aimai Rf CA ani R. U 0. o 3 ? �o ..fl - c0i o G 1- � � C � > � � � } cd N , 'n �; N cd 4� U rn N vi dEn ej cdN yn O U N cn s� o> ❑ ^� -Z3 • > ,� a� ami — " ¢ a`di cd% b 0 CA 0 b�n °'•° Q. maw ° ��d a� o �? ° o o Q Cd 3.° Cd 0 cr En 0 E os N O O N •� O by vUi N• N �-'-� '� •� O U O O Q cd U cd 4. +� bA .., y a O G= .> U U= Q cd E Q� N U v1 O y p by . O O N • • • L: Cd U 9b > 0 v _ 'O O N cn VA '0 0 C N p C to cd cd C .> N Q m 50 to fn ¢ Qc O p O N E N E � bA o UEnx U N aEa��o� +�+R X r 44 N> E o r, y " o ° �' o - to °' a o . d o. > k pE U o n O $-4 6,91 +� ctl , O U U 0 1bA ° 4r+' O 0 to ) o •-- 0 �, o r-+ cd 3 o.tn .�, U _ ¢ 0 cd ° f" N 'U N 0 bA H w w Cd o -o " >,p v 6 0 m cd N N N M o o -a >, bA Cd N,^a N 'C O O p cd Cd r- cd (VAI m E ° o V oIn to Cld En to >~ n N w c cd Cd pCd � En Cl M bA cd > F-+ cd cn rn Q 3 s-. C!� v; tin 6 Pi; �i 0 M 0 N cn VA '0 0 C N p C 00 O U O O O N E N E � bA U N aEa��o� o 0 0--0 0 V cd cm cl o °� > k O U o N 6,91 +� ctl , O U O Q b y0 CD to o •-- + �, N r-+ E 0 0 E Pi; �i 0 ate+ y N V r N� O D O O O s: C. 't O b 7 r +O 0� C1F ��=� O O U 3 •� �/ rn� O r U Ed - ) ,S ; E �p �, f_:. • cid a 7Ui �.," +,:+i � r~ • =� u7 W 0 U c.' z r Q O bbA C . - -- C 4--- O �" Q. ° y U C .0 QS 4CJ CC bA 69 v' U C U te'. O L'. ° CL 09 U Cd O . •.. ° �, ° Q ° o ¢ ... Q v a`�i °'• is �° eu -o L �' bA Cl. 'b .� Cd �., ¢ .r U 'd.1 y C1. o o °3 n o d o .d °� v j y w EACD r +, `rs O o ami v °� o a� ew. O a°�i Q `� cd 4�, v, id ami e°a v +' Al ° d �, •Q " `*' 03 p 69 3 Q O {". C U s. vj r O 4J ear, RO} N ua N �^ ° e�' Vl iii � 7 U U.9 Db �- CC O cd s� O + cd y 'd p a as G CL bQ �+. U '� N U "C5 ll ElCL 0 "° asA Qd�ci o.�,,w sty °;-d-'� o¢ o° o awn o° o v Q �- o _ U Q Ln ° Q E .? 3 ° ami °' �;' W? o u Ln •Q CLw CL iv rn cy a •C D N CL >✓ N O W r C` O p Q . AL rx s 3 a a �'o.' ' W 4 . fl. C7 t�1 cz° e os r- L O O U U U C cn cd C U o_ a �= w k bA cnN U .0 O O bCA a O � C O s. C O C ' N O U rL-• � a frl E~ 1 a N � � M M M Cd Cd Cd O O O .� .ci bA bA by U7 a C 4 O aTJ C C� 4, .d W C13 cd C :^. p" `n vUi U bA U N cd. +C cd O N c�� CO o +O+ O N -0 O U U, cid U> L CQ} U Q U : .b n OU = 4° N Q C� C V y >' n rC r u cd b�� >' " c 0 En MrA Q O N .b C) ed Qn o'd (D Cd O U cd a > a CdU C ' +; o c E O o� 0 ri ax V 0 � O r 4, 4.. v� v 0 O. C y Qn W V Q .+ G i, O U ++ a G7 P-4 U o� N 70 Cd 'o as C b cz bA c!1 II En 00 N c � v O T L cd . c CIS o . O i 0CIS cd U C O. m C L En L Q C � •a U U � cd O � � L U fn +� N (A (47- OU 0 o U o O LQ U cid C C �- _ F � LL N CL U U C cd C 4 O aTJ C C� 4, .d W C13 cd C :^. p" `n vUi U bA U N cd. +C cd O N c�� CO o +O+ O N -0 O U U, cid U> L CQ} U Q U : .b n OU = 4° N Q C� C V y >' n rC r u cd b�� >' " c 0 En MrA Q O N .b C) ed Qn o'd (D Cd O U cd a > a CdU C ' +; o c E O o� 0 ri ax V 0 � O r 4, 4.. v� v 0 O. C y Qn W V Q .+ G i, O U ++ a G7 P-4 U o� N 70 Cd 'o as C b cz bA c!1 II En 00 G H 8 Cd cd O 'a 4" sU a) C a R. ^d bA U ++ cd O (7 O C ani a' y E 4� p � � O � Q p � �� vi U N r- (CL d ' bD O, o 0. cd cd d ° u M y N ,� U a� E �, °° a En d U w E ami -° r cd o �th � ;.b°^n� Cd :IR o o °Q gip+ O O U U v ,� c. in N '+� C1 t]. cd vA d ¢ a Gn w O amiQ �1 v. °*Z �.° = rA O�v U d ry ao W .0Ga c° ° o . ° is co > 4°_ En o CPQ U ,, � cn N " ° = 'v, o Ln aoi U o 71 � u C a� '+ m � r.U v, a 4°. Ncli ami ° d ac ° bo a x o E � o = E p, ° o cdoo cd Q,Cd ° x O v O C O ON 0 Cdp ++ .d C� bA a) �� C cd boa, bA N Q, W v� GG d as ❑.o a W o a .. x Ao m O Cd O O N O N O t ^ 0 p Cd Cd Q U vOi C O O U C's cn —0 0 c O cd ' � N �+ O .O }O., � 'a)N O. N bbI >1 -d C:. N � cd x �. (A Cd su. U O n bA O n O N by En M- cd v, s~ u o U �° = E U C " 14 u a) ;.., Q. +, E Cd cd x U N bq O N+ N O En c an >,� b �p Cd CY „E -L U = cd by --'4 O N cd cd N O o o. v 4C."> a V) C4 C U 0 cl cd 3 ba by cd ' O U O cd � CIS s. n O •U 4, O U � cd CL U U m N O •� _O O y O d O b C o 4� 44"A N by ,� C 3 cd . o d o •-, d a C �0�E CLQ W � -0 c �. °' U or- O b 0cd o cd �^ U O CL cd Cj ( U Q O b 'C7 CL N Nom+ t: a.E.�� a 3 3� O O N ►a Cd O 'O Cn Cd b O 40. 4-+ O U N O O" a� to bo Cd Cd O.. N GL a 0. .O to p C Q cn C N Ocd to ¢ U in m cd '� cd sy0. N cd Q" p s0. .O rA�cd ¢ Zn 0. y, � N vi cid 0Q O y O N O O " U cd " • -. v� o cLd E LO �O CO -0 c� p + d UO C y O U O C U O dd � U NC i G cd 'cd OO xp bfl C +� c- C,3y ° O= � a� cd Cd s. v� 0 cd Cd cd U Cd Cd � C p j cUd O 'dN S3 j 0 .0 �O 0 N o +' cd bo N O U� O C 3 0 bqCd C 0. � rrj -0 Cd g r. 0 U Q. O O y Q] y O O� », O E] n-� Al - 'O O bb O OL OCJ N .� UO cn ecdd bA a o oA b�cn ami o p, orA cd ° c -o ° c ❑ o U v� to aS cd O y OU O cd N O O cn CCd A cn Cd U^Cdbb 4Cn O O N V� L 'O Q �' cd O N O Q.. N �. +r O V] � o C cd M °ME 'n bo cd M rA to Cd Cd m .b cid O �i V ,, 3 N O O U O cd O M L+ N C Q y pL N cd 4 N O 'u O N � `4, M �+ cd 4,0 U O N Q" 'O N 4..GO Z C Ca cd • o '> °-' aA � C 3 _c , N -4 R U cd 6 N O o. U ami o° a. c nEn °° c on c ccd a� c s in 4p ami Ed a� ` 0 3 o c �° to ow.^cq: ° bA ami r Cd >� p 4 cd o U cdEn I aoicdcn co bA i _O �j ^O U C cd E � cd ++ U QI 00 `t � cn fj Q yn cd vOi cd � C � Cd ++ N N cz cd O O as r - 'O Cd r- m U bb UO u m N U t L 4- � � 3 L C's Ln GL a. L N OrA +U U C's '10 O O N _ O 4.0 U N cz cd O O as r - 'O Cd r- m U bb UO u m N — G U .O U ++ C � Cd .� ern �w Q V) a C/] a n 4cd O N cd cd cl) U V G O U UCA n En 0cd N L f1 O G U O C U 0 cd ' cd 4- 0 al U (41 Id 0 4 r. Q, O N D o CdQ- '� 0 O En" a� V N G at> O O Cd y y 0 0 3 •=- O D U U a� U cd •� cd +. � a> >� cqs to r– cd AG O U cd O in N. O +�.+ U. U O ^� iL N U ++ rU+ O 0 w U N cd LU • .w U • O •� Y at L �" '4!t• I q Cd RI 3 U >l .L 41 bA U G G �.. .— d G cd O 00 O M M y ++ >, N U cn U U cd IU. C/J U 1, •O N Q ° cd .: SFr C, C , cd cd 0 c '4= 3s.i o°'z° 0O .0 U U 0 � 4-4y +� at 4' ° 0 0� U ° 0 G ° O tU. En O .=kn O + O b O U O O bA U 4 N> > cd L 3...x.,..0 0 o O V) a C/] a m n 4cd O N cd cd cl) U V G O U UCA –� O � U Lp„ O cd •= N L f1 O G U O C U cd cd ' cd 4- GU C� b O O EEn D o CdQ- '� 0 O En" a� _ cd N G 0 0 0 3 �o 10 m M, r� a to N Obb PLO i"� y � Ll. � N > O� G Y � �••O CC O C U C 'U C c0'd U Cd NO b o i O U o •3 N °L' L ai �° a o. O E to o o bb cd ocd m o o Cdo w cd a cd o cn a, N en O C C x •C n '� cn O ej O O b cd p +� b 4.1 cd a: bA Q tO, o o o�,, 'C o o u o cd 0 V o F.o u Cd o -d ,~ O 0 v C� 7 cl v 'a O N 9 ^d U ta N b UO c. o a�CLi ° aUi cd l o o a"Cd kn a. H . a m cn a a) � bq � cd O cn U a) a) _ 'O 0 O cd cqj C � �d a) v, cd CJ O C a o a) M frl M frl Cd a) cd a) by O aHA ) G 0C�cc, d bA U aU�CU��0. ctj C's ii•+ UQ) "�' Y �--.�. Oc�^3'7 Ua) ❑ CC qj .0 C cd Cd v^b[ O adw 'O i ° V ceca) $0 UO O E cU° cd cC"d cd E O O-= O n co� ON O' U ° ai U bC�A ° a) O C .0 N En to 0 0 * U Cd cd O' s. U N p N O N om. p C U CO cd bA °U cd , rcd Cd =3 b +� U -C O cd `n z > , >? O N o a) a) c4, 1-• Cd � SZ 'O 4. � + -d � O . � Fey' N s . cd c/7 cn Q U w U a) vn rzr Ca. U s. a) O. U cd " cd f., v, cd j- H a3 0 a3 c ZD b C c cn II c U w a a v •o u CI a cd H bio � d v � > O cd > bo Cd cn ' aA oercu a e 0=> Cts 0UoE � 3 o 0 0 y o �; " c>i ami t U y o ' oio ¢ w o m a a o C v o �? v� o �'u v�v� ° d �? 34,E �� a �'�'' cd o o G ° ?, a v y ° 3 ^C3 by aA ' i, Q 2v? x o cd r- 4. C m G� � y U O �� ' ^ U1 Q+ 4) O ' i. 0 uEn ch oo v F- N 0 En Ln i c0 C >; o Ocd . kn �U odM O a" C, o-dx-oU•° -o ° c o 4 t4. o�-o .O C f1id �+. -- o U a o Q v U o 0. on o° ° cl-.I Vl N � >l • Cd U �• C{.., 41 v a °�; c U �? o° x on.°� fl o a v ° v v h i� v ° •� E E d v c +" o cd U °U v v o v bA u v. cd O U i° c'- o m v o+ CM rA CA u t7 v � w do baso `s' bA � Ao LE M ►i5 c� H m F- a E]5 I Ir0 � O cd C 'O Cd Y O t .. o U cd �'o d o i �p,or- U .a -00 CL O. YO ti 'O O N Y O bD po cd .� O N O d O a >> y C , > bD C +�+ Y c cYd Q' U O cd bA ed O O sU, N p 3 N cn O O > 'C _ cd N N U '^ +�- ° O N Scd by C O cd U s`n. U cd °' +' a c °� o O 0 bo `' > 00i U U O O U C Y M r� En 0 v bA O cd N cd d •O cd 0 O� 0cd U P. In � t' A ¢ .d O.. 'UC Up C O C V] n s O V)M a cn +� 'N UUPC U c�c" cd �Cd cd cd CIJ � oq , N 0 Y En 03 n bo`� 'o ani cid n ° n oA ° o u Cd 1 Q c'd E 4' U Gn p[ • • • • • • • • • vO b .� E L� 00 N Ti . CA Q C w Cd C � o C � C bA L � w �i N -d r Cd Cd N y U_ •0 ' N Q-. �„ N U O D N Cd C s C O �? O � O. > 0 G ' to +C.+ O Cy z ��I-d�'3� bo C O tO 0 u N bA CUd KU �. . . bCfl N O N U Cd 0 y L 3 U U O N � N �.' bq N N N pp + Cd C .0 rn n cn =� y Cd 0 y y N y Cd N 3 Cd N Cd N Cd N °' 01 G Cd w O O U O O O_ �' -O s: Cd N U N 'C GL Cd Cd Cd Cd pCtlp U U O • -. � y . � � O > C Y cd bq bA b A 0. N s~ •�brA U � Q. 6" cd' WO. O U Cd �►p • aA a a s a C � U C/] N � U N •� O U N� a cn O Ocn � N to cn O En 0. 4 O O CC U O C ^d C 4. C O O O U th O O Cd rti R. CGd G CGd ' inaj v C N C N G U •U a� � a� a� a� _ • c o. •� 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 4cd � � � � � o En Cd N L Q) Q) bh C)C CL G C p 0. ¢ O U •^ cd >C O p = X t = Cd N Ti . CA Q C w Cd E Iq K, m 0 N N Cd N Q O O Cd 0 Cd cd ° vOi E = Cd y r+ Q O a V O O O 4 N '� d N N to— 0 O, E �^ cn ,o�- M. D d p o b W En N O 3 0 0 0 'O 3 U a� N 00 ° Cd cd cd Oto O o Q. o. o u ' Cd o . � d � cd r. ai O L Cd N >~ >~ by >~ .c 113 E 5 Cd 4. cd 4 0 cd o 0 0M cd N >~ U 0 U c. O Q. 110. O 3 N N Cd O Ucdcd N ' n cd rj cid N V N �. N. U �p : U Q vOi ' O cd �n N N U N N 4 0. 6, �.� 0=Cj c.(A o. 0� on Q o b o p �'CA o ° >; 0.Q1 . o ' c W a��i .d 41 0 = o -d ani aoi � bin oo0 30=w 40-a4) uCd QCd cz Lr- fll is m as 'O G N U N Y Y d °' U � N cd a� a� cd I.. C's o E� ° ° C4° cid s4 00- (41 o ED s~ 'C N c JCd O c`di O bn N N x N a _ � •o V to �w v U bn Cd II cn H _ c cl cn o er c° .° 6 0 4., a b� -0 o o p, o C o O o v, Z 0 o U cd WCdCtj ^^ rA = cd Cboa��W��>oox C 3 E 5 U �' o. °�' d U" a) ¢' 4= o U o a E O .0 a� `" GG o Z o o 3 b c ^a U `0 o > w bon i >~ 0 b�A 1f? O L i ' n N U v .d M 61 U N d N V' n O �/? Kj cd U Z 6ZO a' C O a� O C } v' ai s, cd >rlb p vOi °" cd o. • m O L C Q .= o W O o m cn Con 0 C-1 0Ma o'Cd c� a o Liz; 0 ai 0 3> o ctj U V Q Cd U t'.. Cd N r--� Cd +, y tN o V 0 Cd En M C7 a u. n. -0 _•. � O U O Q y O a o � -o O N p U O N r=-. cn CC C O �' ,� N •� U O �, 0 0, En ++ 41 U CL.cd O cd L V c U O 4-• 0In CIS n- r -L CIJ UO 0 3 Cj +•.' L o^O 3 E O 3 cQ CJ G O R1 N .o �>-, cd rA N ccd id C . U bA .p N o N L• U C Cd Q C O C U N n cd N N O -p cd C C7 0--o s x O o n. M° a- a� Z m [� M r'i v U bn Cd II cn H R R a E E-� � N C bn cd O " N C � N Cd Cd `it, 30 + o U N v, O O O O R, b Cd bn G O cd bbn 0 0. N Cd N _- O U Cd ON -0 > > E CL ^� �Cd�'�_�� O v a 0 o cd Cd cd U 0Cd i + i y- cd cd cd C cd N E�. E —°� d) y ^o U Q N �, c o o o �° ° : ° p c ' 0 r.r 'F'•` U N cd Q , I V1 °0 aCA ' a N ' s�. �O -o �" i�r a� cd ° O o cd a Q O - 3 -� p .c rn _ o .p cd l ctjC-) ° cn N °cli -Cy U U cd v� cd +� o CO cd O U O O O cd c� U -0 � U '^ r U � C •� O O •[� .� y i O N �, C t" by C a° > 0> N 2 O. O U O O G1 Qn V cd ^, i. a3 Q '� O • n Q E� cd o° zd rocd m rn r� � N C bn cd O " N C i O Cd Cd `it, 30 U N v, O O >=1 O Cd OCd j G cd N EO 0 0. N U N _- O U Cd ON -0 > > E CL ^� �Cd�'�_�� v a 0 o v N R—i U_ a G 4-i O 4"" cd O .N O N 3 N vOi O y cd 4y U O N >~ O O Cd N cd to rn in I O >=1. N cd' O b z O O N cd Cid > ^O V to d 'b cd Q O b CL O t� wb 'n Cd O CL N dj _N p c� Q � •N N O c •VI Cdcd Cd L � � O >~ 15 .2 9 9p cd N bA O 00 O cC O a b ��Q Cd a c oCdbD a°�i aoi aki -o , ami � ° 3 '*= M �' N >1 U N O V s~ cd N �.r+ cd cd Z O O U N n a a 3 CJ o o -v o cdo ami —c,, bD p O o U O Cd O �' bA O 04 04 E OU cd cd �' Q, ZZ O O b ccn d' a Cr1 cd U bOA N o � _ u o u +� C � � oA � c� w Q V] cd a -O 3 Q bA E6cct n �+ U C O O O 'O 4. O In G) C 4. .� Z V. 'C O cd O rn Cd O O s0. CL O N +' O +� r- O bA N. 4: a. (n N >~ U ate+ bo 4. .O N N O O n U O. U C bb O cd t^ bA Cc ° O O U y U L y cd 0 C,3N U ��, cd > O cd L bAcq3 � v' 'O O '�. > O p ' cd v' N o U p N° O cd bA OU tU L N C U N + C." E cd U G CZ cd 4. rn vi O O y L �' 4. L cdd U N .0 O. N a O bA cd N 41- N • V U -0 bA cd > O O O. d ,�, O y U N y +U+ 'C O o• O vOi N O bOA cqj p y° o v' aoi (424 cd L O °03 U cqj N•Vi • rn °? -' O . CGLC45 CdN VtiN bb >�v� E r p^ L ami a o 0 cd Cd o o o a r 3 S V z C O cd 0. � U N C cd b y cd U Uj Cd 0 00 •° N 0 O �' a end n c p b01D 0 O 'd o V cd O U n O a N U U '� 'C U cd O Q C O O N cd bA O P- O cod rroA G� P. =wi, 0 a . � U O O 0 L cd a , ^ate o A" y 3 �o -o 4. U o "O cdU V] ccdd U c°7 _ V q Rte. y •O U L ,v �i J, c cd U C bA V) r- 03 aj N II N L ►_ r� E E N aj E C, c+0-' U G O O O E 'U w E E v� "o U G � E ¢ O c cd r- y b cd H� 3w _. cqj G rA> G G cd bA =s +L 'C N Cd O O r-ICCC C Cd cd0 C 3 o S1 cid py' O U —14 M bo .c G U °' °' ° a73 bb C U C H cd >a U 0 ° O Cd W 4..'a 0 to • o bA N W N cd, W C O 'C cd, U kcqj Cdn 'C [� O ¢ cdscd. M U O >� O OU N>• O bA r:zY ° " '+� v] a a> 00 cd 73 i C G aCibQA N W O.14 a Id b U bA cd " ^O U a" '� U _ cd �' '0 c2j U .`4 ,� bA 4., 7,, V) a. 70, Li 00 N U � w [n L 4. N O Cl),_ O ° N U 5 'O O ccd � U S1 � O L U c G (1) 4 ,G C OU O L0. Cd +- bA a r.O 3 O r1 a I C) cd +cq O Cd '0 C3 s°'. nu on > Cd a 0 O (; En�°Ly C6 U '� U M Cd Cid 0 Li -o a o r- C's Cd Cd Lp 0 M cd Ecd 2 •v p� z�. �.� ° c ' - ° bA E a.)3 ti r- 0 a. ... p >O - G Q/•� N bA bq �^ + I [� o � c ° vL C� bAcd .. U N 0O' . �" U CCS > cd O E U N N sc�.. 0E y O 4> [� L bb N bb O N -0En `i' UUE V7 0 o o ° Cd F En in rn 0 i cn 0 0 U o +� ° ' 0 0 0 +; U m C O a. c^rd O+ _ °� U O Qrte+ °U A,Ube 'O C O E Cd .�, O U > = cd C U U a c 0 cd cd c bb bq c o cqj acd U- o U b 0' ° 0 3 42 7EL 0 L bn o cd r- n - ".O 4° �o 3 �° c ,� w 0 0 cn bn Ecqj= o c V)= ° = c !_ a. o a°. ° ° a°, � a Cd a°. n. (n 0- � M M M V) a. 70, Li 00 N E:, E CA a QL. L O L 0 U T O 'O 'Okn +� y0 Ed �1• O •� O C, U cd bl) vi C1. � O G cOd C; y b d M U cn z o'( N O :EN N U 'O O N4 Cd N U cLcf U N n p > r 0 �_ En n C C's 3 O.> 9 -.cd O �' 03 L. � � Cn M 0 O= O � O. N � -� LO � C,jp O 0 ¢ cd > U O w Q cd CS b b -1 OU U c 3 U N En U O � En m 'C N a. � � N >~ O y dCd � U CQ CISO � a � � N O � En En En En p En � � O N W � U N N L O Cd cnn O % O O cd 0 cd Cd O ^10 -0bb U cn 0 U �aoi C) cu U U L �j ^ V] N bOA OCA U b O O cd b cn o U o .0 C's ' 5 cd = O— W cn O Z U b b cd o bC6 U C's y (~ L O 1�0 >~ n cd 00 M cn cn in. .01 C N cd Y C N •� Y C C O cd C N O G1. O Y Cd C O N n• O 3 L N � C C � O O p O � � � � F F � cd aL`di id L O cd N ^O .01 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Draft EIR ES -31