The URL can be used to link to this page

2005/07/13 City Council Agenda PacketCity of Rohnert Park*6750 Commerce Boulevard*Rohnert Park, Ca. 94928 Phone: (707)58&2227*FAX: (707)588-2274+WEB: wwwrpcityorg RORNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, and PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL JOINT MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, July 13, 2005 MEETING LOCATION: Bacchus Restaurant/DoubleTree Hotel 1 Red Lion Drive, Rohnert Park, California 5:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL JOINT MEETING with the PLANNING COMMISSION and the PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION Open/Call to Order/Roll Call: City Council (Flores Smith Spradlin ,_,_,Vidak-Martinez Mackenzie Planning Commission (Adams_ Callinan Hubley_ Stafford Kilat__) Parks & Recreation Commission (Black Butler Griffin — Hansen Rogers, Stevens— Bird—) Unscheduled public appearances: For public comment on agenda items if unable to speak at the scheduled time (limited to 3-5 minutes per person, or allocation of time based on number of speaker cards submitted, not to exceed a 30 minute total time limit) [G.C.54954.3(a)1 ITEMS FOR REVIEW, DISCUSSION &/or DIRECTION: General Plan Implementation Process I. General Plan Overview 2. Planning Areas a. Specific Plans b. Stadium, City Center, Agilent Areas 3. Updating the General Plan 4. Roles of Planning Commission and Parks & Recreation Commission - Review of Planning Commission and Parks & Recreation Commission roles in processing developments 5. Water issues: a. Water Supply Assessment (WSA) b. Infrastructure required 6. Sewer issues: a. Collection system infrastructure b. Incremental Recycled Water Program - Review by City of Santa Rosa Representatives c. Recycled Water - Review by City of Santa Rosa Representatives 7. Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP)/Development Agreements a. Capital Facilities b. Services 8. Other informational items, if any ADJOURNMENT no later than 7:00 p.m. for dinner DISA.BM ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Offices at (707) 588-2227 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the City Manager's office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.) JH-h:071305AGENDA Special A Wg-Miry Council-l*b ming and P&R Commissiow - This agenda has been posted in accordance with State Law, The Brown Act - 1 7/13/05 Special Meeting -Agenda Packet Distribution List Armando F. Flores Council Member 1420 Middlebrook Way Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Amie Spradlin Council Member 7209 Ruby Court Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Bonnie Black Parks & Recreation Commission 1065 Hawthorne Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Thomas C. Hansen Parks & Recreation Commission P.O. Box 2037 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Susan Hollingsworth Adams Planning Commission 5758 Davis Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Shawn Kilat Planning Commission 1374 Rebecca Way Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Jake Mackenzie Mayor 1536 Gladstone Way Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Vicki Vidak-Martinez Vice -Mayor 556 Lydia Court Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Bill Butler Parks & Recreation Commission 1188 Cielo Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Chuck Rogers Parks & Recreation Commission 1319 Gaspar Court Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Joseph T. Callinan Planning Commission 5710 Dexter Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Pam Stafford Planning Commission 5793 Dexter Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Tim Smith Council Member 4467 Hollingsworth Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Michael Bird Parks & Recreation Commission 503 Dixie Court Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Gerald Griffin Parks & Recreation Commission 4541 Fairway Drive Rohnert Park, CA 94928 James Stevens Parks & Recreation Commission 7494 Monique Place Rohnert Park, CA 94928, Dan Hubley Planning Commission 135 Alma Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 W. W J O -----(:3 Ijnif1-j) _�,vm>i?jvcj ),,vmo08 Saeria l3-fl1 Distr.Q Mtg. Of:—.—Ill-3/or cc: File: File: I— Q W C- \ \ �fQ \ t t\ \e� f SOFTBALL FIELD \\ ♦♦♦♦ PATH TO FUTURE ♦ SMART STATION MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 0 LIVElWORK (RE -USE) MSTIN6 LOFTS � 6 000 (RE -USE) p L --j IL I F-1 1.0 97 ll.t V —'-- OFFICE (RE -USE) .... : 1 f t f f VILLAGE SQUARE WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL n NEIGHBORHOOD GREEN COMMUNITY ICONS GRAND WALK WITH TREES MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK —� WITH SOCCER FIELD Preum;WV.Y Mien-uve QK9�nCrT��L' NKN nErSRy CR ?C OJK� QRK�WNML' 1'EIIM GFGT! (6 -If �4�+51 REtifTT�4'. Cp�JblWPT;M: 0 S� Joao SU�a 6.29.x5 ---r �-- BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR r -r r CI .'i > ' �`�i SONOKts illr� SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL P4 AV\.(clu XuAk, k \ ` , 1 t ♦ t>t \ 1 f � 1 � f � r ' I ♦ 1 l \ r f ---r �-- BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR r -r r CI .'i > ' �`�i SONOKts illr� SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL P4 AV\.(clu XuAk, �o LIVENVORK LOFTS (RE -USE) 0 pry (RE -USE) ( 8E10 ,r r Nl��SOFTBALL FIELD FIELD 1 1 f.;c�c .�,� � � OFFICE (RE -USE) L ' ♦ - - t ate - 1 t d .s+ ................. ... ... �I Ty PATH TO FUTURE SMART STATION ' : ii j j `' .tet--=-`— r y �, 3 • . - k r .. =F.r ;k-�...:,:�• �: � VILLAGE SQUARE \ a WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL x , IL MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL °T�� JVVII:ri.♦ � NEIGHBORHOOD GREEN �. y� ' COMMUNITY ICONS �. Lvj u i� BIO-SWALE ALONG . : f ��r, R a r EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR GRAND WALK WITH TREES ,1� j` r Yews % St10BLM� n (lal}!s?fKQ� MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL t �� ` `� C �' SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK WITH SOCCER FIELDwu Pup ^Yrr !, i'i7.rar};-r"1,,'s'Y"-jT'r' fir f`Tnnn. Ij A-1, Yt O Stro lox ',<: rz V�tC CUE r �CUt76wf Aga,_ i ' C I'Tl I cDn; I DI r' O � ' D' i oI ' �I B OD WA i Y PARKWAY (FUTURE) 0 r 0 \ LIVE/WORK 19AST(N6 LOFTS (RE -USE) Ne6000 (RE -USE) CM Wr-7( ) J L__J &I*cg� `i` i • 1 1 77 SOFTBALL FIELD `� "� OFFICE (RE -USE) js ` � 1 ` � 1 PATH TO FUTURE SMART STATION r ----` VILLAGE SQUARE WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ��;.� `e NEIGHBORHOOD GREEN '. __ 1" hh COMMUNITY ICONS "'°ems;.--- • NN BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR 17 GRAND WALK - -� WITH TREES ----4- , 1 � views SONOMA MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK WITH SOCCER FIELD \, e � Pr. l;l.'.fJc'.v Casoaohneh,r Q� roctty (n•so oars) °ec.asnrtw. «evu% owan Cc -n ow.rJ � r 1 Qw�p,�'r'�'smr t+-saaU �45TtN6 e i nv.Fs 1 e � i COPONG \ SUMA M004TAIN V(U.AZ ow 'Bv,lp. G.Z 3. Cri' r�CU(ZUi�GL, IDMCitGrw h V( Lwrc i �_ A� •�•. _ ...+.rte+ r.•..w.iwrir.r� �� ,. MRry1 �i b1 1 • ♦� � � �`� '�f r MIS /1 1 t' 1 ►1►•f' � �. � MINI � *.1 1%t Wiwi "'0N'fs %� ~ dill"',' out, • `;�IHlll!i�/,f "rl �illuw,l�lur /i�iii rrnr� s I ,i 1� � ; l��j� �Il1�l Y1� f 1 � � � • r �•, A/ a £ ,y� 91��! 1 ' .• _ IIA;,! � ��,,n•�•- � t � •'1 trrrlr Ir req/: � ►//fir / . • • • � j � f 1 Iii l : 1 11 l�flff� � �A • =f OiP9111111, swill; ow 'Bv,lp. G.Z 3. Cri' r�CU(ZUi�GL, IDMCitGrw h V( Lwrc `n+ Recycled Water Uses Allowed* In California This summary is prepared for WateReuse Association, from the December 2, 2000, Title -22 adopted Water Recycling Criteria, and supersedes all earlier versions. Treatment Level Y (I Disinfected Use of Recycled Water Tertiary Recycled Water Disinfected Disinfected Secondary -2.2 Secondary -23 Recycled Water Recycled Water Undisinfected Secondary Recycled Water Irrigation of: Food crops where recycled water contacts the edible portion of the crop, including all root crow.— Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Parks and playgrounds School yards ; Residential landscaping j Unrestricted -access golf courses Any other irrigation uses not prohibited by other provisions of the California Code of Regulations Food crops, surface -irrigated, above -ground edible portion, and not contacted by recycled water Cemeteries Freeway landscaping i Restricted -access golf courses Ornamental nursery stock and sod farms with unrestricted public access Pasture for milk animals for human consumption Nonedible vegetation with access control to prevent use as a park, la round or school Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed. Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed - Allowed Not allowed Not allowed. Not allowed Allowed — Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Allowed Allowed i Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed j Allowed Not allowed Not allowed ,: Not allowed Allowed Not allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed,,' Not allowed Orchards with no contact between edible portion and recycled water — II— Vineyards with no contact between edible portion and recycled water I -------------____...-------------�-------- ------_._ � Non food -bearing trees, including Christmas trees not irrigated less than 14 days before harvest Allowed Allowed -------- - Allowed Allowed Allowed __..----.. _----- Allowed Allowed Allowed i Allowed ---------- Allowed Allowed --------------- Allowed _ __ _ ___ __ _ __ Fodder and fiber crops and pasture 'for not producing milk for human consumption Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Seed crops not eaten by humans Allowed Allowed Allowed Food crops undergoing commercial pathogen -destroying processing before consumption bv humans_ Ornamental nursery stock, sod farms not irrigated less than 14 day before harvest Allowed Allowed` Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Supply for impoundment: Nonrestricted recreational impoundments, with supplemental monitoring for pathogenic organisms Allowed** Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Restricted recreational impoundments and publicly accessible fish hatcheries Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Landscape impoundments without decorative fountains Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Supply for cooling or air conditioning: Industrial or commercial cooling or air conditioning involving cooling tower, evaporative condenser, or sprang that creates a mist Allowed*** Not allowed — Not allowed Not allowed Industrial or commercial cooling or air conditioning not involving cooling l tower, evaporative condenser, orspraying that creates a mist Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed WateReuse Association 1 (916) 442-2746 www.watereuse.org/h2o Recycled Water Uses Allowed* In California This summary is prepared for WateReuse Association, from the December 2, 2000, Title -22 adopted Water Recycling Criteria, and supersedes all earlier versions. * Refer to the full text of the December 2. 2000 version of 1-itle-22: California Water Recycling Criteria. This chart is only an informal summary of the uses allowed in this version. The complete and final 12/02/2000 version of the adopted cileris can be downloaded from :<http•Jlwvnv.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwom/publicat ons/Regulafions/recycleregs indox.htm> " With 'conventional tertiary treatment". Additional monitoring for two years or more is necessary with direct filtration. Drift eliminators and/or biocides are required if public or employees can be exposed to mist. "" Refer to Groundwater Recharge Guidelines, available from the California Department of Health Services. Prepared by Bahman Sheikh and edited by EBMUD Office of Water Recycling, who acknowledge this is a summary and not the formal version of the regulations referenced above. WateReuse Association 2 (916) 442-2746 www.watereuse.org/h2o Treatment Level Use of Recycled Water Y Disinfected Disinfected I Disinfected I Tertiary I Secondary -2.2 Secondary -23 i Recycled Water I Recycled Water ( Recycled Water Undisinfected Secondary I Recycled Water Other uses: Groundwater Recharge JjAllowed under special case-by-case permits by RWQCBs**** Flushing toilets and urinals i Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed. Priming drain traps Industrial process water that may contact workers v Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Structural fire fighting i —� Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Decorative fountains Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Commercial laundries Allowed Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed ' Consolidation of backfill material around potable water pipelines Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Artificial snow making for commercial outdoor uses Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Commercial car washes, not heating the water, excluding the general public from washing process _ Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Industrial process water that will not come into contact with workers Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Industrial boiler feed Allowed ( Allowed Allowed Allowed 'Not allowed Not allowed Nonstructural fire fighting Allowed Backfill consolidation around nonpotable piping Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Soil compaction Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Mixing concrete Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Dust control on roads and streets Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed' Cleaning roads, sidewalks and outdoor work areas Allowed Allowed Allowed Not.allowed, Flushing sanitary sewers �— ( Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed * Refer to the full text of the December 2. 2000 version of 1-itle-22: California Water Recycling Criteria. This chart is only an informal summary of the uses allowed in this version. The complete and final 12/02/2000 version of the adopted cileris can be downloaded from :<http•Jlwvnv.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwom/publicat ons/Regulafions/recycleregs indox.htm> " With 'conventional tertiary treatment". Additional monitoring for two years or more is necessary with direct filtration. Drift eliminators and/or biocides are required if public or employees can be exposed to mist. "" Refer to Groundwater Recharge Guidelines, available from the California Department of Health Services. Prepared by Bahman Sheikh and edited by EBMUD Office of Water Recycling, who acknowledge this is a summary and not the formal version of the regulations referenced above. WateReuse Association 2 (916) 442-2746 www.watereuse.org/h2o CAM I N O COLEGI O 4. LIVEIWORK (RE -USE) MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD GREEN GRAND WALK WITH TREES MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK —� WITH SOCCER FIELD w.euN�r:xny '�Vt..ClMB�T !'I.PfJ MITt:IG-V9E Rt9�01TTi4L kfiN mF'6([Y (11 -?C O4/K) 31ACt.m MFJIIM L'!fv[fi4 (lW5lWA;if.' sm G.24.65 r-aev_4' LOFTS (RE -USE) fl 1� OFFICE (RE -USE) ... .. ........................ i ' 1 ' t 1 i t 1 � 1 / VILLAGE SQUARE WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL t�cTUl�.f t'44ESE'HU� COMMUNITY ICONS BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR Vl ews SONOMA mo t1Nt'PIN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL �wccUGtUNPc, LAMS l` i L ' •a E 1 �5T1N6 i i "cPt-5—Z`(g5 1 � • • 1 c i i r-aev_4' LOFTS (RE -USE) fl 1� OFFICE (RE -USE) ... .. ........................ i ' 1 ' t 1 i t 1 � 1 / VILLAGE SQUARE WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL t�cTUl�.f t'44ESE'HU� COMMUNITY ICONS BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR Vl ews SONOMA mo t1Nt'PIN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL �wccUGtUNPc, LAMS 1% \' .. LIVE[WORK —7 LOFTS (RE -USE) 6A pen (RE -USE) 50 4 77 '71 7 1 SOFTBALL FIELD OFFICE (RE -USE) PATH TO FUTURE SMART STATION F -Z VILLAGE SQUARE WITH RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD GREEN COMMUNITY ICONS BIO-SWALE ALONG EXISTING TREE CORRIDOR GRAND WALK WITH TREES V P MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK rr WITH SOCCER FIELD I X-C vltr* Alm& seon tC :! Overview of Subregional Water Recycling System Distr. a Mtg. of: 13 t .4 i cc: seon tC :! Overview of Subregional Water Recycling System Distr. a Mtg. of: 13 cc: L�✓�cz-v�C cc: File:- S'2, 5,x,6 O File: Prepared for City of Rohnert Park Dan Carlson, Deputy Director of Operations Dave Smith,, Program Manager July 13, 2005 Topics • Treatment and reuse system • Planning to meet future needs 1 Subregional System Y y C, ♦ N all +l a F Irrigation System Acreage j63a° y t y 0 Urban Landscape a a, o Pasture tlziN �1 °`l h ti �6 C] Vineyard z F o Other Food ` 0 i y p:: lyi S , { a 560 of the 630 total urban landscape acres are in Rohnert Pk 3.8 billion gallons recycled water irrigated in Rohnert Pk since'96 2 Rohnert Park Irrigation System • City of Rohnert Park —13 parks, golf course —Community Center . — Public safety buildings • 9 Rohnert Park/Cotati schools • Sonoma State U. campus • Press Demo, State Farm, Agilant/Codding Others Using Recycled Water Local • Windsor • Marin • Dublin/San Ramon • San Jose • Santa Rosa Nationwide • 1,059 parks and playgrounds 9'593 schools 3 Water Quality Public Safety Regulations and • State regulates water recycling • Subregional System produces highest quality recognized in regulations —Considered pathogen -free — Suitable for any use except primary drinking water supply Water Quality Regulations and Public Safety (continued) • Effluent meets drinking water standards • Research on other wq constituents ongoing • Groundwater is protected — Irrigation, not groundwater recharge - Long travel time (years) provides treatment — Street runoff hasn't contaminated gw Ell Planning to Meet Future Capacity Needs • City of Santa Rosa -obligated to develop capacity needs of partners • Capacity needs based on general plans — Geysers project based general plans in '94 — Rohnert Park GP modified '95 and '00 Capacity Allocation (mgd) Member Currenta Contract Planned RP&SSU 3.14 3.43 5.15 SR&SPCSD 12.35 16.31 19.14 Sebastopol 0.60 0.84 0.84 Cotati 0.44 0.76 0.76 Total 1 16.53 21.34 25.89 a 2004, latest information mgd = million gallons per day 119°0. s � lacy-. ID's Ppb } tee, Z Current k im Contract A S Planned 5 Plan to Meet Future Demand • 25.9 — 21.3 mgd = 4.6 mgd = 2,200 MG/yr Component Target Range Conservation 300 MG 150 — 300 MG Geysers 400 MG 0 — 21200 MG Urban Reuse 500 MG 0 — 21200 MG Ag Reuse 11000 MG 0 — 21200 MG Total 21200 MG -- mgd = million gallons per day; MG/yr = million gallons per year [01 n1nfi Dlstr @,Mtg -Of: . 3 a� cc: - • CC• l.�Ovt.ar _. Recycled Water Uses Allowed* In This summary is prepared for WateReuse,Association, from the December 2, 2000, Title -22 adopted Water Recycling Crite wat Treatmen.t Level Disinfected I Disinfected Disinfected Undisinfected ,,/ Use of Ree cled Wafer Tertiary Secondary -2.2. j Secondary -23 Secondary Recycled Water Recycled Water Recycled Water Recycled Water Irrigation of; r Foodceops.where recycled water contacts the edible portion of the Allowed'Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed aro s includin all root crops , Parks and Playgrounds Allowed +Not allowed - Not allowed �Notfallowed School yards Allowed Not allowed Not 6116W&>,"Not allowed `; �' 4 Residential landscaping Allowed :Not allovyed Not allowed - to Not allowed, f Unrest ricted-access golf courses Allowed `Not allowed Not allowed; 'Not allowed . . 4•t `F ,. Any other irrigation uses not prohibited by other provisions of the Allowed Not allowed :' ; Not allowed, ` California Code of Regulations' tNot�alloswed Food crops, surface -irrigated, above-ground'edible portion, and not Allowed I Allowed Not allowed Not allowetl contacted b recycled water ; Cemetertes Allowed I Allowed Allowed Not allowed Freeway landscaping, !) Allowed Allowed Allowed Not;allowed '� i y AllowedNotallowedk _ Restricted -access golf courses _-- I Allowed Allowed — - - -_— Ornamental nursery stock and sod farms with unrestricted public access) Allowed Allowed Allowed t Notiallowed'� Pasture for milkanimals for human consumption l Allowed Allowed i Allowed $ d'Nof allowed Nonedible vegetation with access control to prevent use as a park, Allowed Allowed - Allowed s allowed,; la round or school and . • -- �.. , Orchards with'no contact between edible portion, and recycled water Allowed Allowed, Allowed Allowed Vineyards with no -contact between edible.portion and recycled water i Allowed Allowed i Allowed Allowed Non food.bearing'trees, including Christmas trees not irrigated less than Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed 14 da s'lefore harvest ----••__-•- _ __ , _ _ _ _ Fodder and.fiber crops and pasture for animals notprotlucing milk for _—_--_ Allowed Allowed _ Allowed Allowed human consum' tion Seed -crops not eaten by humans Allowed Allowed. Allowed Allowed Food: crops undergoing commercial pathogen -destroying processing Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed, before consumption by humans— Omamental nursery stock, sod farms not irrigated Less than 14 day Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed ; before harvest. Supply_ for impoundment: Nonrestricted recreational impoundments, with supplemental monitoring , , Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed.:z for: atho enicorganisms x t Restricted recreational impoundments and publicly accessible fish Allowed Allowed Not allowed `` zNot allowed hatcheries n k Landscape impoundments without decorative fountains Allowed Allowed Allowed ~ Not,allowed Supply for cooling or air conditioning: Industrial or commercial cooling or, air conditioning involving cooling Allowed"* wot allowed` f Not°allowetlk tower _eva or2tive condenser, ors rp aging that creates a ITltst _ =- _. - - - - -•->' h^ ' ' ' Industrial or commercial cooling or air conditioning not involving cooling Allowed Allowed I Allowed 'Woo'.: Power,evaporative condenser, or'spraying that creates a mist I wat Recycled Water Uses Allowed* In California: This summary is prepared for WateReuse Association, from the December 2, 2000, Title -22 adopted Water Recycling Criteria, and supersedes all earlier versions. • Treatment Level i Disinfected i i Disinfected Undisinfected Use of ReCyCIeC1 Water' I Tertiary Secondacte2.2 Secunda rY ry Secondary Recycled Water Recycled Water ! Recycled Water Recycled Water Other uses:' Groundwater RechargeIjAllowed under special case-by-case permits by RWQCBs""" Flushing toilets and urinals I Allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed: ---- _n c ow _411 ' Priming drain traps _ - Allowed r, Not allowed, Notallowed�, " Not,allowedn> _-- —'--------------•-- -. � ,'. ' . -r�.a . r= -*.u{ • NvriJxu".�:_ r Lam.'; .,,,.a� ------= Industrial process water that may contact workers __ _ _ Allowed }:" Not allowed ' Not allowed,Nlitallowed� Structural fire fighting . Allowed • "Not'allowed ' ': Not allowed 3, y� Not allowed Decorative fountains Allowed Not allowed =., Not allowed 'Not ? allowed Commercial laundries Allowed Not allowed • ' Not allowed ti� Not allowed sty Consolidation of backfill material around potable water pipelines' Allowed `A,Not allowed ; Not'allowed 41NI61t:aIlbM —. , Artificial snow making for commercial outdoor uses Allowed `rNot allowed "`.' 'Not allowed Not allowed;; Commercial car washes, not heating the water, excluding`the general - _ {` r washing Allowed Not allowedNotallowed 'f g Not aY►owed. public from process Industrial process water that will not come into contact with workers Allowed Allowed Allowed r Not allowed Industrial boiler feed Allowed_ Allowed Allowed FNot:allowed Nonstructural fire fighting Allowed — Allowed Allowed rzNotAIIbWed .a Backfill consolidation around nonpotable piping Allowed Allowed Allowed Not allowed Soil compaction Allowed Allowed Allowed x � Notallowed Mixing concrete Allowed Allowed Allowed -N&IbWW64ia Dust control on roads and streets Allowed Allowed Allowed , Nbt�IIdWdd I Cleaning roads,.sidewalks and'outdoor work areas Allowed Allowed AllowedNot allowed `3 r, ""Nit Flushing sanitary sewers Allowed Allowed Allowed Allowed Refer to the full text of the December 2, 2000 version of Title -22: California Water Recycling Criteria. This chart is only an informal summary of the uses allowed in this version. The complete and final 12/02/2000 version of the adopted criteria can be downloaded from: <hhp:ftwww.dhs.ca.govtps/ddwem/pub4cations/Regulations/recycleregs index.hlm> With ."conventional; tertiary treatment". Additional monitoring for two•years or more is necessary with direct filtration. Drift eliminators and/or biocides are required if public or employees can be exposed to mist. Refer to Groundwater Recharge Guidelines,.avaifable from the California Department of Health Services. Prepared by Bahman Sheikh and edited by EBMUD Office of Water Recycling, who acknowledge this is a summary and not the formal version of the regulations referenced above. '. WateReuse Association (916) 442-2746 www.watereuse.org/h2o Distr. (� Mtg. Of: 3 D S" cc: File: �aGndar'c%i•it�i File: I�vS A Ro In-ert Park Water Supply I — sessment Joint Meeting City Council Planning mmission-and Parks and Recreation Comm ` n July 13, 2005 r pHNERT PAR f I( 19 62 w CALIF0R14 £ Water Sbp-pl Assessment • Legally required prior to proval of large developments. • Adopted January 2005. • Compared Demands to Available SuA from Three Water Sources: ■ Imported Russian River water from So County Water Agency ■ Groundwater ■ Recycled water from Santa Rosa Sub - Regional Treatment Plant 1 City Gro_'lUnc water Supply • Historically — City pu ed up to 5,350 acre-feet per year (AFY) wells. • Water Supply Assessment shoe future well use to be 2,577 AFY • Water Supply Assessment shows aquifer can support. 3,900 to 5,200 A for Rohnert Park. City SurfaCe,Water Supply • Surface water comes fr La4 ke Sonoma and Lake Mendoci via Sonoma County Water Agenc • Supply available in worst drought is 87,000 acre-feet per year. • WSA conservatively assumes only 75,000 AFY is available. 2 City Surfa'oe Water Supply • Rohnert Park's contrac ith Water Agency provides 7,500 AF • WSA conservatively assumes o 6,476 AFY is available. WSA does not assume Water Agen delivery system is expanded. City. Rec-y'dedl Water Supply • Current use 1,040 AFY. Could expand by 262 AFY thro ". additional parks, schools, and s' plans. Total potential recycled water 1,302 AFY. 3 Citywater Supply Sufficiency Noo mai Year - Total Supply: 10,355 AFY - Total Demand: 95 - Supply —Demand: 856 - At general plan buildout in a normal year City has 856 AFY more water than it needs to meet all demands. City Water Supply Sufficiency Single Dry Year - Total Supply: ,129 AFY Total Demand: 7,8 r; Supply —Demand: 11269 A�:,, a n At GP buildout in the worst single dr year, City has 1,269 AFY more water „ than it needs to meet reduced demands. 11 City a#e_r Supply Sufficiency M u I t�i 'pl eDry Year • Total Supply: 9879 AFY • Total Demand: 836 • Supply —Demand:, 1,200 • At GP buildout in the worst three yea drought, City has 1,200 AFY more water than it needs to meet reduced demands. Thank Your R City Strate�.les to Address Groundwater Concerns ■ Decrease groundwater use and M74Use imported water use ■ Expand groundwater monitoring progra y ■ Expand water conservation program • Continue recycled water use for irrigation • Protect groundwater recharge areas • Support joint subbasin study Rohneft-P�ark Water Conserv�fion • Between 1997 and 2004 Total Use Down by 18% • Between 1997 and 2004 Per Capita Use Down by 21 %. R Z V Re -charge Areas Recharge areas (and po tial recharge areas) located generally e t of Urban Growth Boundary. Soils under Rohnert Park are predominantly Clear Lake clays wi permeability and poor recharge characteristics. Future development within UGB will incorporate ways to protect these areas (e.g., buffer zones along creek and surface drainage courses). Rohnert Park -Is Decreasing Its Use of Grou-dwater - Decreased groundwater pum r by 72% from 1997 to 2004 o Shift to more SCWA surface water and less groundwater pumping Summary#Groundwater Level 'Trtmds Regionally Shallow zone (depth< 200') groun a_ levels are stable. Locally Deeper well completions. ( depth > 200') exhibited a water level decline as pumpinc increased; water levels display significant recovery in response to the pumping decrease. M. 9 v Shallow els, North and West of Rohnert Park Spring Groundwa -e Levels and Annual Pumpage 300 6500 fIl 200 _..__ _._..__._.._.._._._ 5500 R a m c w 100 �_.- .,.,., �..a -+-• w--- +_w' -a-: .. 4500 ., 3 R ED CD a 0 3500 m c � 0 -100 2500 1975 1985 1995 2005 —12M1 15A2 15J3 26L1 —27H1 —Pumpage Note: Pumpage includes the following wells: Rohner Park, Cotati, SSU, and PWC Canon Manor m 10 Y� Shall -ow- Wells, South of Rohnert Park Spring' Ground��f-L eels and Annual Pumpage 6500 300 ! E t ` c200 200 -....__._...................._._...._.........................-......_._.... -- -...- - -- - 5500 0 D m 1 �.. ♦ . x . � ...4 A, �'.".. --I,--M-..r...J_.i ....�, ili W.,....«.. w ..._a ... ,,�! �._;.•o-. d100 ................................._....,..._...._...._-.......------.....---••- ---- - -- - T 4500 -v > ; c CU 3 � 3500 1 0 3cD I 3500 „ .. 0 fl, M CD t 2500 -100 2500 -100 3� 1975 1985 1995 2005 —01L2 - 02H1 ---- 07A1 -- 30R1 — Pumpage -RP 01 RP 08 ---RP_14 •* RP 24 -Pumpage Note: Pumpage includes the following wells: Rohner! Pads, Cotati, SSU, and PWC Carron Manor Note: Pumpage includes the following welts: Rohnert Park, Cotati, SSU, and PWC Carron Manor 10 Y� Deepe r -Go-'pletion Wells, Rohnert Park Spring Groundwa�ev-Levels and Annual Pumpage 6500 300 ! U I i ` c 200 _._. _ ..... _ _ .__._.____ _....__._. _ . _ _...._ __... _�---.-_---- 5500 B D m I � LU _._.. --..___-.---= - -- ---- -- - m100 4500 -v i- CU 3 - ,t I i' 3500 0 > .� _.. w. II „ .. i -100 2500 1975 1985 1995 2005 -RP 01 RP 08 ---RP_14 •* RP 24 -Pumpage Note: Pumpage includes the following welts: Rohnert Park, Cotati, SSU, and PWC Carron Manor 10 Y� June 3, 2005 r. To: Parks and Recreation Commission Members &Staff Liaisons Planning Commission Members & Staff Liaisons City Council Members You are cordially invited to attend a Joint meeting of the City Council, Parks & Recreation Commission, and the Planning Commission Wednesday, July 13, 2005 at the Bacchus Restaurant in the DoubleTree Hotel. The meeting will be held from 5:00-7:00 p.m. with dinner served at' 7:00 p.m. Please call or e-mail Beth at City Hall with your choice of the following'selections (one from each number): 1) Asparagus soup or House Salad 2) Pasta with Pork Fennel Sausage and broccoli rabe or Half chicken with baby carrots, almonds, and oranges or Filet Mignon with garlic mashed potatoes and spinach or Alaskan Halibut with potatoes and spinach 3) Mocha Creme Brulee or Panna Cotta (eggless vanilla bean custard) RSVP: Beth 588-2226 or blidster@rpcity.org by Friday, 7/1/05. CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: 09 /3'0S Name: 1 Address:-/ At./) C( Phone: Z?- TOPIC: Z TOPIC:�- CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Name: r► j'� Address: Phone: TOPIC: SO(+�t.o.� j La, Brief Summary of Comments: _ I See Reverse -> Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan Special Joint Meeting — July 13, 2005 General .Plan ' What is a General Plan? ➢ Required by State Law for each city and county ➢ It is the community's vision that includes plans for: Growth Physical Development (facilities and services) Conservation ... and strategies for accomplishing that vision. 1 :r/,Te.. General Plan What must a General Plan be? 1. Comprehensive — Applies to all areas and addresses full range of issues 2. Internally Consistent a. Horizontal b. Vertical 3. Long Range - Typically 20 year period, with updates every 5-10 years General Plan What areas does the General Plan pertain to? 1. Planning Area — Extent of Area considered in formulating the General Plan 2. Sphere of Influence - The primary area within which - urban development is to be encouraged 3. Urban Growth Boundary — Voter -approved, so not in all General Plans N, General Plan Objectives 1. Urban Growth Boundary and Growth Management Program for slow, managed growth. 2. A "Greenbelt" around the city. 3. City/University Integration, and Mixed -Use Centers. 4. Balanced Neighborhoods. Small-town feel, affordability and diversity. 3 General Plan What are the mandatory elements? 1: Land use 2. Circulation 3. Housing 4. Conservation 5. Open Space 6. Noise 7. Safety General Plan Objectives 1. Urban Growth Boundary and Growth Management Program for slow, managed growth. 2. A "Greenbelt" around the city. 3. City/University Integration, and Mixed -Use Centers. 4. Balanced Neighborhoods. Small-town feel, affordability and diversity. 3 General Plan Objectives 5. Improved crosstown connections. 6. A Network of Open Space. 7. Pedestrian- and Bicycle -Friendly Environments. 8. Enhanced Community Character. Urban Growth Boundary What is an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)? • . Officially adopted line limiting urban development • Can be adopted by majority vote. Voter -approved UGB requires voter -approved amendments • 20 year time horizon • Need not be same as Sphere of Influence 4 3 Land Use: Goals • Compact urban form, with a defined UGB • Gradual transition to open space • Balanced land use program • Concentrations of activity and mixed-use pedestrian - oriented centers. • Close physical & visual relationship with SSU • Maximize accessibility to parks, open space, & shopping • Range of housing types • Land uses to reflect diverse range of jobs Buildout Population and Jobs General Plan Buildout: Population and Jobs 1999 Estimate Increase to Buildout Buildout Population Total 41,000 8,400 50,400 Annual Growth Rate 1.0% Housing Units 15,540 4,450 19,990 Jobs Total 21,900 9,700 31,600 Annual Growth Rate 1.9% Building Area (sq. ft.) N/A 4,920,000 N/A Employed Residents 21,200 4,800 26,100 Jobs/Employed Residents 1.04 1.21 61, Growth Management: Goals • Small-town feeling; carefully planned slow, managed growth. • Growth paced to achieve General Plan buildout over 20 years (I% pop. growth rate). • Balance of land uses and variety of housing types. • Contiguous and compact urban form. • New development paced with public facilities. • Discourage urban development outside of City limits. • Minimize impacts of growth on existing City. Growth Management: Policies Policies include: • Growth Management Ordinance that includes: — Adequate public facilities; — "Trigger cap" on development, (average of 225 units/year); — Adjacency requirements; — Process and criteria for development agreements; — A monitoring program, including annual review • Year 2020 Urban Growth Boundary • Housing Program, using redevelopment monies 6 Community Design: Goals Urban Form and Views • Pedestrian -oriented activity centers. • Strong connections between neighborhoods and between neighborhoods and activity centers. • Open space network. • Views of the eastern ridgeline. • Scenic corridors. • Distinct urban edge. Community Design: Goals Neighborhood Design • Diverse and distinctive neighborhoods. • Mix of uses and a variety of housing types. • Attractive neighborhood streets. Commercial Centers • Safe, convenient, and comfortable pedestrian connections 7 Transportation: Goals • High levels of mobility along all major street segments and at major intersections. LOS C as the service standard for all arterial and collector roadway segments and intersections, except for LOS . D . for particular segments and intersections • Improve vehicular connections across US 101 Transportation: Goals • Alternative modes of travel—including transit, bicycles, and walking • Pedestrian -friendly activity centers • Network of pedestrian routes and bikeways 8 a Open Space and Parks: Goals Open Space • Greenbelt around the city • Open space surrounding the city • Minimize conflicts between agricultural and urban uses • Maintain and enhance Petaluma Hill Road scenic corridor Parks • Integrated system of parks and trails • Additional parkland in the city Schools: Goals r • Work to ensure that all school-age children living in Rohnert Park can attend public schools in Rohnert Park. • Work with Cotati-Rohnert Park USD to find alternative uses for facilities that are closed or may not be needed in the future. 9 Water Supply and Conservation: Goals • Use surface water supplies, and reduce reliance on groundwater. • Promote water conservation measures. 1511 IM f 5 pec ail yhechh3 1 Introduction and Overview 1.1 ROHNERT PARK: A CAPSULE HISTORY Rohnert Park was founded as a master -planned community on the former site of the Rohnert Seed Farm, located along the Northwestern Pacific railroad right-of-way. The original 1954 master plan was based on the "neighborhood unit" concept of clustering single-family homes around local schools and parks. The master plan featured eight neighborhoods, each with 200 to 250 homes, a 10 -acre school, and a five -acre park. In 1956, the Rohnert Park Community Services District was founded, and work began on digging wells, building a sewage plant, and installing water lines, sewer lines, and streets. By 1957, the first homes had been constructed. At the same time, the segment of US 101 from Petaluma north past Cotati was completed, making Rohnert Park more easily accessible from points throughout the region. Also, the California Legislature approved funds for Sonoma State University (SSU), which was located within Rohnert Park until moving to its current site in 1966, initiating the City's long relationship with the University. In 1962, at the time of incorporation, Rohnert Park bad a population of 2,775, and the City limits encompassed 1,325 acres (approximately 2.1 square miles). The city grew quickly as the Bay Area economy continued to grow, and the demand for housing exploded'. By 1980, urban uses extended from US 101 in the west to Snyder Lane in the east. The 1980s saw growth extend west of US 101; "G" section, east of Snyder Lane, was built in this period. Growth in the 1990s was slower because.of limited availability of vacant land within the City limits. In 1999, the city had a population of about 41,000 and an area of nearly 4,400 acres (6.9 square miles), with nearly half the land dedicated to residential uses. Figure 1.1-1 shows the evolution of Rohnert Park from 1965 to 1999. In conjunction with residential growth, Rohnert Park also attracted commercial and industrial development and acquired a sizeable job base of almost 22,000 employees by 1999. Commercial and industrial uses are concentrated west of the railroad tracks and north of Copeland Creek. Major employers include Hewlett-Packard, located within an industrial campus in the southeast corner of the city, State Farm Insurance, and SSU. The Double Tree Hotel, Rohnert Park Municipal Golf Course, and the Sonoma County Wineries Association make Rohnert Park a popular hospitality center. Rohnert Park's limited Sphere of Influence (SOI) includes the Wilfred-Dowdell Specific Plan area (24 acres in size; plans for which were developed in 1999) and Canon Manor, where further development is hindered by the need for public facility improvements and the ongoing debate about how to fund the improvements. SSU is located outside the City's SOI. 1-1 EXCERPTED FROM ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN 2000 C^ Rohnert Park General Plan 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE GENERAL PLAN The Rohnert Park General Plan is a document required by State law and adopted by the City Council that addresses issues related to physical development, growth, and conservation of City resources. It: • Outlines a vision of long-range physical and economic development and resource conservation that reflects the aspirations of the community; • Provides strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow this vision to be accomplished; • Establishes a basis for -judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with Plan policies and standards; • Allows City departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance critical environmental resources, and minimize hazards; and • Provides the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance, specific plans, and the Capital Improvement Program. WHY HAS THIS PLAN BEEN PREPARED? General plans typically look out 20 years in the future -and are revised every five to 10 years. Rohnert Park adopted a General Plan in 1990. This plan was updated in 1995, but with a horizon of 2000. In 1996, Rohnert Park voters approved Measure N, -which confirmed the existing City limits, along with a 24 -acre area (Wilfred-Dowdell Specific Plan area), as the boundary for urban growth for a four-year period, slated to expire in July 2000. As of mid -1999, the city is almost entirely built out. Only about 190 acres of commercial and industrial land within the City Limits are vacant and available; more than half of the available non-residential land is part of the existing Hewlett-Packard development. There are no remaining residential sites. Thus, this General Plan has been prepared to: • Respond to the need of having policies to guide Rohnert Park's growth before urban boundary provisions of Measure N expire. • Ensure that the General Plan reflects Rohnert Park's current planning context, and includes goals, policies, and desires of Rohnert Park citizens; and 1-2 1965 \ I Population: 4,412 U Figure 1.1-1 Sequence of Development Rohnert Park General Plan Address the issue of land availability to meet the City's economic development objectives, the need for housing in the community, and State law requirements for Rohnert Park to accept its "fair share" of the regional housing needs. ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN: VISIONARY AND REALISTIC The General Plan articulates a vision for the city, but it is not merely a compendium of ideas and wish lists. Broad objectives such as "quality of life" and "community character" are meaningful only when translated into tangible, feasible actions. Thus, while each element of the General Plan articulates long-term goals, it also includes action -oriented policies that outline concrete and achievable steps to attain these goals. The Plan is comprehensive and long-range in scope. It will be used on an on-going basis, because many City regulations, requirements, and actions are required by State law to be consistent with the General Plan. Since the Plan is general, there will be circumstances and instances when detailed studies are necessary before policies can be implemented. PLAN PREPARATION PROCESS To help prepare this General Plan, the City Council established an Oversight Committee that included two City Council members, two Planning Commissioners, consultants, and key staff members. This Committee was charged with reviewing results of previous work done on the General Plan, such as the 1997 community summit, and preparing a General Plan that defines a long-term vision of the city. The Committee met on a frequent basis and considered input from randomly chosen focus groups, open public workshops, and other methods of outreach. A community workshop was held in January 1999 to solicit ideas for the General Plan and was attended by 110 people. A wide variety of viewpoints were expressed by a mix of participants from all segments of the community. A second workshop held in February 1999, and attended by 120 people, provided an opportunity to gather input on three alternative land use scenarios and served as the basis for the preferred plan. Subsequent workshops helped refine the preferred plan and the proposed Urban Growth Boundary. 1-4 Chapter T: Introduction and Overview 1.3 GENERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS State law requires each California city and county to prepare a general plan. A general plan is defined as "a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries, which in the planning agency's judgment, bears relation to its planning." State requirements call for general plans that "comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency." A city's general plan has been described as its "constitution" for development — the framework within which decisions on how to grow, provide public services and facilities, and protect and enhance the environment must be made. California's tradition of allowing local authority over. land use decisions means that the State's cities have considerable flexibility in preparing their general plans. While they allow considerable flexibility, State planning laws do establish some requirements for the issues that general plans must address. The California Government Code establishes both the content of general plans and rules for their adoption and subsequent amendment. Together, State law and judicial decisions establish three overall guidelines for general plans. The General Plan Must Be Comprehensive. This requirement has two aspects. First, the general plan must be geographically comprehensive. That is, it must apply throughout the entire incorporated area and it should include other areas that the City determines are relevant to its planning. Second, the general plan must address the full range of issues that affects the city's physical development.. The General Plan Must Be Internally Consistent. This requirement means that the general plan must fully integrate its separate parts and relate them to each other without conflict. "Horizontal" consistency applies as much to figures and diagrams as to the general plan text. It also applies to data and analysis as well as policies. All adopted portions of the general plan, whether required by State law or not, have equal legal weight. None may supersede another, so the general plan must resolve conflicts among the provisions of each element. The General Plan Must Be Long-range. Because anticipated development will affect the city and the people who live or work there for years to come, State law requires every general plan to take a long-term perspective. 1-5 1.4 OBJECTIVES AND THEMES GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES Several objectives for the General Plan were identified and considered by the Oversight Committee, based on public outreach conducted early in the General Plan process._ The objectives provide s foundation for development of the goals and policies in the General Plan, and include: • Establish a 20 -year Urban Growth Boundary; • Keep the city's small-town feel; • Provide for slow, managed, and predictable growth; • Increase housing affordability and diversity; • Establish better cross-town connections; • Maintain or increase open space ratios within the City; • Encourage local jobs and maintain the jobs/housing balance; • Build and maintain infrastructure in anticipation of growth; • Integrate land use planning with SSU expansion plans and establish better connections with the University; • Uphold or improve current levels of city services; • Encourage socioeconomic diversity; • Ensure legal adequacy and address external jurisdictional issues, including coordination with the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), Sonoma County, and Rohnert Park's neighbors; • Increase pedestrian and bike access; • Provide a framework for design standards that reflect these objectives; and • Create options for the city's edges. Allow for soft boundaries and scenic corridors. THEMES Building on these overall objectives, the General Plan is structured around several themes, which form the basis of goals and policies throughout the document. 1. An Urban Growth Boundary and Growth Management Program. The General Plan establishes a 20 -year growth boundary, "trigger" caps on development, and adequate public facility requirements. These policies and programs will ensure phased and orderly development, and a sustained high quality of life. 1-6 Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview A "Greenbelt" around the city, with targeted growth areas. Growth is targeted in selected areas to the east and northwest to reinforce a contiguous and compact urban form. Land surrounding the city, where Rohnert Park's boundaries do not coincide with Cotati's, are maintained in open space. An open space buffer is also maintained between new growth areas and Petaluma Hill Road. The buffer varies in width and includes both open land and recreational facilities. , . 3. City/University Integration, and Mixed -Use Centers. The General Plan designates a new pedestrian -oriented University District—envisioned with a mix of residential, retail, entertainment, and office uses that cater to students, faculty, and staff, as well as residents—along Rohnert Park Expressway north of the campus. In addition, the City Center, adjacent to the Expressway and Commerce Boulevard, is designated for a mix of public, office, residential, and retail uses. In addition to these two new centers, the Wilfred-Dowdell Village is already being planned as of 1999 and provides a variety of shops and commercial uses, in a pedestrian -oriented enclave on the westside. 4. Balanced Neighborhoods. A guiding premise of the Plan is that activities and facilities used on a frequent basis, such as stores and parks, should be easily accessible to residents. Land uses are designated to ensure balanced neighborhood development with a mix of uses and housing types, provision of parks and schools, and easy access to mixed-use and commercial activity centers. 5. Increased Connectivity and Accessibility. The city's existing neighborhoods have few interconnecting streets, and US 101 limits east -west access. Improved connections between neighborhoods, as well as new connections across the highway are included in the General Plan. Roadway improvements and new streets are also proposed to link different neighborhoods and to connect residential areas with SSU. 6. A Network of Open Space. Using creeks, as the armature, an interconnected network of open space, parks, and trails is provided. These will also enable connections from existing neighborhoods to open space areas beyon&Petaluma Hill Road and the SSU campus. 7. Pedestrian- and Bicycle -Friendly Environments. Policies for land uses, mixes, intensities, and urban design are established to encourage walking and bicycling. In activity centers like the University District, policies are also established to promote small block sizes and frequent local streets, which help maximize the permeability of a neighborhood for people walking orbicycling. 8. Enhanced Community Character. The General Plan establishes specific urban design policies at a citywide, neighborhood, and street scale. Connections between neighborhoods, transitions between urban and open space areas, city and neighborhood edges, community orientation of development, building massing, and streetscapes are all addressed. Policies are also included for viewshed protection. 1-7 Rohnert Park General Plan 1.5 REGIONAL LOCATION AND PLANNING BOUNDARIES REGIONAL LOCATION As shown in Figure 1.5-1, Rohnert Park is located in central Sonoma County along US 101, in the northern San Francisco Bay Area. The Russian River, the Sonoma and Mendocino coasts, and the Sonoma -Napa wine country are all short distances away. The Pacific Ocean to the west, with its cool marine air, and the warm Sonoma Valley to the east combine to create a mild climate, with mild, wet winters, dry summers, and seasonal fogs. Sonoma County as a whole is characterized by rolling hills and a series of valleys. Rohnert Park lies within the broad Cotati Valley, which is bounded by the low, rolling coastal hills to the west and the Sonoma Mountains to the east. Several creeks run into the city from the eastern ridgeline. The hills, along with the surrounding crop fields and pastures, provide a rural backdrop to the city. Figure 1.5-1 shows Rohnert Park's regional location: The city shares its boundaries with Cotati to the southwest. Santa Rosa's Urban Boundary at its closest point comes to within 1,000 feet of Rohnert Park. The city shares portions of its northern and northwestern boundary with two County -designated Community Separators — open spaces that separate Rohnert Park and Santa Rosa. SSU is located just outside the city's eastern boundary. PLANNING BOUNDARIES State law requires that each city adopt a general plan "for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which ... bears relation to its planning." Figure 1.5-2 shows the Planning Area. The boundaries of the Planning Area are Stony Point Road to the northwest, Todd Road and the Santa Rosa Urban Boundary to the north, the Taylor Mountain and Sonoma Mountain ridgelines to the east, and Licbau Creek and the Northwestern Pacific railroad right-of-way to the southeast. To the west the Planning Area boundary is conterminous with the 1999 City Limits, because Rohnert Park abuts the Cotati City Limits and SOI on that side. N, The Planning Area does not represent the area contemplated for annexation or development, but is the extent of area around the city that was studied and considered in preparing the plan. For example, ridgeline views (the Sonoma Mountain ridgeline is located approximately four miles east of Petaluma Hill Road) are addressed in Chapter 3: Community Design. The Planning Area has not changed from the 1995 General Plan. 1-8 Monte Vista Graton Occidental Sebasto; bdey Ford Bloomfield 72 ,bmrt Park St. Helen 0 kv Sprinp Sonoma S 0 L A>TN Vallejo iS an/ 0 Dockell "IB a y t"\ Pinole 4 El Sob p YJ San Pabl C 0 T R A Richm C 0 �S `,T A 80 El Cemito Alban Ber eley n' A^ A \S C 0 Em""ll 13 a - Figure 1.5-1 Regional Location Tm,(0r Mm 1401 . °R re G F MIUBRAE AV �- 1—{� ._ 110LLY..:�'AVE•: QI 5 `c?./N1lFk 'AVE. - i ��b�..,✓r r\ �" CbURSF Sonana Erin <��.. ...!...�-...,ti... _ � ••Ab �' -�. f' `♦.',Elevation 3450 vim. .�. `\ r S. dhe a -) C OST A LL� FWtROAG'iAVE... o x000 w �S e000 FEET ----- Planning Area ----- City Limits (1999) .......... Sphere of Influence (1999) Figure 1.5-2 Planning Area Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview The City's planning process includes monitoring and updating the General Plan and implementing Plan policies, updating the Zoning Ordinance, preparing other implementing ordinances, specific plans, design guidelines, and other studies called for in the General Plan. An annual General Plan Report will provide an overview of the status of the General Plan and its implementation. Ordinances and documents the City must update or prepare upon adoption of the General Plan include: Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance is'one of the primary implementation tools of the General Plan, and it is required to be consistent with the General Plan by State law. The Land Use and Growth Management Element, as well as the Community Design Element, call for specific revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. A comprehensive update of the Zoning Ordinance will be necessary in order to implement the new General Plan Diagram and land use classifications, land use policies, and policies relating to the intensity, bulk, and character of new development. Specific Plans. The City has already prepared a specific plan for the Wilfred-Dowdell area, located on the westside. To provide additional direction for new development, policies in the Land Use and Growth Management Element call for preparation of specific plans for all new development areas and identify the boundaries of the new specific plan areas. Requirements for specific plans are laid out in the State's Government Code. Neighborhood and Special Area Plans. A concept plan for the City Center was prepared in early 1999. The City may consider establishing neighborhood and special area plans for additional areas with unique planning needs. Neighborhood and special area plans need not necessarily address all the topics required by State law for specific plans. All specific plans and neighborhoods and special area plans must be consistent with the General Plan. The City retains the authority to require specific plans for areas in addition to the ones included in the General Plan. Redevelopment Plans. The City's Community Development Area is the City's redevelopment area, as authorized by the State's community redevelopment law, and includes most sites in the city that were vacant as of 1999. In redevelopment areas, the property tax increment from new development is reinvested into the redevelopment area, whether through public improvements, economic development strategies, or other measures. Redevelopment plans are required to be consistent with a city's general plan. • Growth Management Ordinance. A Growth Management Ordinance is called for, in order to establish a comprehensive growth management program. The ordinance would establish conditions of approval for new development, annual "trigger" caps Rohnert Park General Plan on development, requirements for adequate public facilities, and other relevant provisions. • Subdivision Regulations. Revisions to the City's subdivision regulations may be necessary in conjunction with establishment of the Growth Management Ordinance. Conditions on approval of tentative subdivision maps would need to be established in order to reflect the goals and policies of the growth management program. • Capital Improvements Program. A Capital Improvement Program would need to be established to review and program public facility needs within the city, in conjunction with new development. The program is established through policies in the Land Use and Growth Management Element, as part of an overall growth management strategy. AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN As the city's guide for development, the General Plan is the heart of the planning process. It is intended to be a living document and, as such, will be subject to more site-specific and comprehensive amendments over time. Amendments also may be needed from time to time to conform to State or federal law passed after adoption, .and to eliminate or modify policies that may become obsolete or unrealistic due to changed conditions (such as completion of a task or project, development on a site, or adoption of an ordinance or plan). State law limits the number of times a jurisdiction can amend its general plan. Generally, no jurisdiction can amend any mandatory element of its general plan more than four times in one year, although each amendment may include more than one change to the general plan. This restriction, however, does not apply to amendments to: • Optional elements (such as the Community Design Element); • Allow development of affordable housing; or • Comply with a court decision. ANNUAL REPORT The California Government. Code requires City staff to "provide an annual report to the legislative body on the status of the General Plan and progress in its implementation" (Government Code § 65400(b)). This report must also be submitted to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Housing and Community Development. It must include an analysis of the progress in meeting the city's share of regional housing needs and local efforts to remove governmental constraints to maintenance, improvement, and development of affordable housing (Government Code § 65583, 65584). In addition,. any mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) identified in the General Plan environmental impact report (EIR) should be addressed in the annual report because they are closely tied to 1-12 Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview plan implementation. Finally, the annual report should include a summary of all general plan amendments adopted during the preceding year and an outline of upcoming projects and general plan issues to be addressed in the coming year, along with a work program. The Rohnert Park General Plan Annual Report will be prepared by City staff during the early stages of the budget process and submitted for review to the Planning Commission, which will make a recommendation to the City Council. Public comments on the Annual Report may be submitted in writing to the Planning and Community Development Department. The Planning Commission and the City Council also will hear public comments on the Annual Report at duly noticed public hearings. PERIODIC REVIEW The City will prepare an Implementation Plan within six months of the General Plan's adoption. That Implementation Plan shall contain language that allows for technical changes to be made in the General Plan. Furthermore, implementing ordinances required by the policies of this General Plan shall be adopted as soon as appropriate. The City will undertake a periodic review of the General Plan, to determine how well the General Plan has performed, that is, whether policies related to development and conservation have been effective. This review will include: • Analysis of the effectiveness of implementation programs and strategies initiated to carry out the Plan; • Assessment of the City's job/housing balance; • Review of growth trends since Plan adoption, assessment of future urban land needs, and review of growth phasing; and • Review of Performance Indicators, which reflect progress towards implementation of the General Plan. The first review of the plan will start five years after adoption of the Plan. As part of the review, a target date for a comprehensive update of the General Plan will be established. A report summarizing City staffs findings and recommendations will be circulated for public comment and then presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will review the report and make a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission and the City Council also will hear comments on the report at duly noticed public hearings. 1-13 Rohnert Park General Plan 1.7 PLAN ORGANIZATION The Rohnert Park General Plan is organized into the following chapters: 1. Introduction and Overview. This includes General Plan objectives and themes, State requirements, and requirements for Plan monitoring, review, and amendments. 2. Land Use and Growth Management. This Element provides the physical framework for development in the City. It establishes policies related to the location and intensity of new development, citywide land use policies, and growth management policies. 3. Community Design. This Element outlines policies to ensure that new development protects and enhances the community character. Urban form, edges, and views, and neighborhoods, buildings, streets, and parks are all addressed. 4. Transportation. This Element includes policies, programs, and standards to maintain efficient circulation. It identifies future street and bikeway improvements, and addresses alternative transportation modes and parking. 5. Open Space, Parks, and Public Facilities. This Element outlines policies and standards relating to regional and local open space, parks and recreational facilities, and public facilities, including schools, water, and wastewater. 6. Environmental Conservation. This chapter outlines policies relating to habitat and biological resources, water quality, air quality, and historic and archaeological resources. 7. Health and Safety. This Element addresses the risks posed by seismic and geologic hazards, flooding, as well as other topics, including solid waste management and recycling, hazardous materials, and emergency management. 8. Noise. This Element includes policies to limit the impacts of noise from traffic, railroad service, and other sources throughout the city. 9. Housing. This Element, which addresses housing availability and affordability according to State requirements, is bound in a separate volume. 10. Youth and Family (Reserved). This Element, when completed, will establish policies to promote the health, safety, and welfare of youth and their families. 11. Economic Development (Reserved). This Element, when completed, will establish policies to promote economic expansion and job growth in the city, balanced with the need to maintain the city's. character. 1-14 - Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview CORRESPONDENCE TO REQUIRED ELEMENTS The General Plan includes the seven elements required by State law — Land Use, Circulation, Open Space, Conservation, Safety, Noise, and Housing. The General Plan also includes an optional Community Design Element. Table 1.7-1 shows how the Rohnert Park General Plan elements correspond to State -required elements. Table 1.7-1: Correspondence Between Required Elements and Rohnert Park General Plan Elements Required Element General Plan Element Land Use Chapter 2: Land Use and Growth Management Circulation Chapter 4: Transportation Open Space Chapter 5: Open Space, Parks, and Public Facilities Conservation Chapter 6: Environmental Conservation Safety Chapter 7: Health and Safety Noise Chapter 8: Noise Housing Chapter 9: Housing POLICY STRUCTURE Each element of the General Plan is introduced by brief background information that establishes the policy context. This background material is neither a comprehensive statement of existing conditions nor does it contain any adopted policy, except where specifically stated otherwise. Readers interested in a more detailed description of issues related to a particular topic should refer to the "related documents" listed at the end of this Chapter. This background information is followed by goals and policies: • Goals. Building on the General Plan objectives, goals are statements of overall philosophy and approach to resolving major issues. • Policies. Policies are specific actions that implement the stated goals. They may establish procedures, standards, or programs or call for specific City actions. Explanatory material accompanies some of the goals and policies; it provides background information or is intended to guide Plan implementation. The use of "should" or "would" indicates that a statement is advisory, not binding; details will need to be resolved in Plan implementation. Statements of "shall' or "will" are mandatory. Where the same topic is Addressed in more than one chapter, sections and policies are cross-referenced, typically in italics for easy reference. 1-15 Rohnert Park General Plan Policy Numbering System Policies in the General Plan are organized using a two-part numbering system that is intended to give each goal and policy a discrete, easily referenced number. The first part refers to the element (or the subsection within the element), and the second refers to the specific goal or policy. The first part is represented by the abbreviated initials of the element or subsection (such as LU for Land Use and GM for Growth Management). For the second part, goals are represented by a capital letter and policies by a number. Thus, the first goal in Chapter 6: Environmental Conservation is EC -A and the first policy is EC -1. RELATED DOCUMENTS As part of General Plan preparation, several technical studies were conducted to document environmental conditions and analyze alternatives for development and conservation. While these background studies and environmental documents have guided Plan preparation, they do not represent adopted City policy. Documents include: • Environmental Setting for the City of Rohnert Park General Plan Update, October 1997; • Community Issues Report, January 1998; • Land Use Alternatives and Preferred Plan, May 1999; • Fiscal Impacts of General Plan Alternatives, May 1999; • Draft Environmental Impact Report, October 1999; • Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report, May 2000; and • Final Environmental Impact Report [to be prepared after completion of the public hearing period]. . 1.8 GENERAL PLAN APPLICABILITY This General Plan shall apply to all development proposals within the existing and/or proposed city limits, unless otherwise specified in the provisions of this Plan. Applications for development. submitted prior to the approval of the General Plan (July 25, 2000) (including applications that have been presented for development and architectural review and other discretionary permit applications) are hereby exempted from this General Plan and are considered "grandfathered" into the Plan. 1-16 i' to: to: Rohnert Park Planning Areas Special Joint Meeting — July 13, 2005 Rohnert Park General Plan Specific Plan Areas There are six Specific Plan Areas identified in the General Plan: • Northeast - Mixed Density Residential • Northwest - Mixed Use (residential, commercial, retail) • Southeast - Mixed Use (residential, commercial center) • University District - Mixed Use (high density residential, office, retail) • Wilfred/Dowdell - Commercial • Canon Manor - Low Density Residential 6144- 1 i - i al Flyuet Rl Specific Plan Areas Northeast Specific Plan East of Snyder Lane between "G" Section and Keiser Avenue. Will include: 1. 1,063 Residential Units 2. 17.6 Acres Parks 3. 56.9 Acres Open Space NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA iccenn LAND U�� GRAM wa:m�siau°�mo wuaivawuvwms + i i L i. ,�,o ,:— �® ®oamwua uwsosa.,nm �� g Northwest Specific Plan West of Redwood Drive and north of Business Park Drive. Will include: 1. 800-900 High Density Residential Units 2. 40-50 Acres Commercial 3. 15-25 Acres Office 4. 55-65 Acres Industrial 3 Northwest Specific Plan Council has allowed for Specific Plan to be processed in two stages. The first stage is that portion south of Wilfred Avenue, which is proposed to include: 1. Up to 495 High Density Residential Units* 2. Up to 305,000 square feet Commercial 3. Up to 551,000 square feet Industrial* , 4. 2.0 acre Park * An Industrial/Residential "flex" zone is proposed which would accommodate either use. If area is developed with Industrial uses, the Residential yield would be 294 units. Residential _Z tot fi r -`w`. r commercial k ` r ' a�us�ine" ss Park Dry° p industrial or � ��` Figure 4-1 Northwest Specific Plan Southern Area Land Use Plan Rohnert Park, California North o wa W 4 0 Southeast Specific Plan East of Bodway Parkway, west of Petaluma Hill Road, north of Valley House Drive. Will include: 1. 499 Residential Units 2. 20,000 s.f. Commercial 3. 5.8 Acre Park WHNEIT PARK X -CA SPECIFIC PLAN � rat1nr:ntxcuvcaua r_r�•�s:� 5 QmQrW eo+��uX+aK awn Y.t X c ua� g uw[Xrc g WHNEIT PARK X -CA SPECIFIC PLAN � rat1nr:ntxcuvcaua r_r�•�s:� 5 University District Specific Plan Primarily north of Rohnert Park Expressway, west of Petaluma Hill Road, and south of Keiser Avenue. Will include: 1. 1,610 Residential Units 2. ' Up to 250,000 square feet Commercial 3. 14.5 Acres Parks 4. 63.4 Acres Open Space �I�I�I�I.�i�AI�I�hI�i •I�i�i�i� •':':•:. i�i::i.!%:'•�•:i! ig835BIS�g�BF81� iii KIMI � . f 6 Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan West of Redwood Drive and east of Dowdell Avenue (south of Home Depot). Will include: 1. 20 Acres Commercial 2. Motel or hotel site � O Acceae at Hama Depot ".W A bowPwafe alr ww" tdo projects lend=ped setback O For moo-serft rete . pa-Wn in fr M WI&V behind. Fm hotel w nwtr—M bulft in Aantat oM w and parft bWW o CwberD "rA gdeaoq aaose W,*WAw wdf r slide to traject Y dn O trpoved WRWAvwaW Redwood Dd.. Y4wsecdw ONawbrr-wgwwftdl k wdwed WWmd Avarua O Mr T-0 CRY property IWA PMW& brAccVad setboct O Sprube Redwood D6W WwsAvws+atMrescdan O Ede Mond WSsAvwue b DowdOAvmw O -we bas w mfrs stow wd Wft ederobn ®'Ab" fired• MMIO aPa vidtr Boma wraveet pwkkq O Com wee dev*WWt toduaed od'Wieps SbeeC B POW" drlvoere" onto DWA,WAvenbe ©Srarumdhg Pa t)g O Endre mkrWe IendawPe etreenbp m OWW Avmae Mdwod wd mrlvdendsd to BWnesa Perk Oe G Canon Manor Specific Plan 1. Existing partially developed subdivision 2. Would require Specific Plan to be processed 3. General Plan shows up to 210 units in this area 4. County adopted EIR for area; based on Penngrove Water Co. providing water and City providing sewer Specific Plan Areas Current Status There are four Specific Plans underway: • Northeast, Northwest (South), Southeast, and University District There is one undergoing Supplemental EIR preparation: • Wilfred/Dowdell 8 I Specific Plan Areas Next Steps -Northeast, Southeast and University District — Draft EIRs to be released shortly. 45 -day public comment period. Specific Plans and EIRs to be considered subsequently by Planning Commission/City Council. After adopted, on to LAFCO for annexation. • Northwest (South) — EIR process begun. Draft EIR expected in Fall 2005. 45 -day comment period. Likely Specific Plans/EIRs considered in Winter 2005-06, then on to LAFCO for annexation. Specific Plan Areas Next Steps • Wilfred/Dowdell — Supplemental EIR to be released shortly. 45 day comment period. Likely to be considered by Planning Commission/City Council in Fall/Winter 2005. After adopted, on to LAFCO for annexation. 9 Rohnert Park General Plan Other Development Areas There are two potential planned developments currently in the works: • Stadium Area Master Plan - Mixed Use (commercial, industrial, residential • Agilent Property- ???? There is one concept plan area being developed: City Center Concept Plan - Mixed Use (commercial, office, residential Stadium Area Master Plan 1. Approximately 40 acres currently developed with RP Stadium and wastewater ponds 2. Due to presence of Costco, slated primarily for larger commercial development 3. Submitted plan also shows potential for industrial and residential uses 4. Not a Specific Plan area, but considered a Planned Development area 0 10 U SAPDZD — Land Use & Circulation Plan p gLn 31 Rohnert Park, California Agilent Property Master Plan 1. Approximately 80 acres currently developed with industrial campus 2. Approximately 80 acres of vacant industrial land remain to south 3. Potential for redevelopment with a Mixed -Use "village"? 11 City Center Concept Plan 1. Approximately 32 -acre area, extending from Highway 101 to railroad tracks and including "Padre Town Center." 2. Concept Plan approved by Council that envisions "downtown" for City, including City buildings and mixed-use development with a pedestrian -friendly "Main Street" extending east -west through site. 3. Site is not within a Specific Plan or Planned Development area, rather projects are considered case-by-case for compliance with Concept Plan. {_. �• 1 y i � <�� , 4:_..a.�'w .,. „+.Hia i! �• RSRti�K'XR{��. Nifi'.11 .. rjc u.auw c.�.e'rwxe %/, war ca�+.wnsa.a � ,e t . ROHNERT PARK CITY CENTER Iv4�T�nAT.¢rf� R:vefii Ftk Uw r„wna. =� ”" d " LAND USE DIAGRAM 12 Stadium Area Current Status/Next Steps • Final Development Plan has been received and is in review. • EIR preparation has commenced. Once Final EIR ready, 45 -day public comment period begins. Final Development Plan to be considered subsequently by Planning Commission/City Council. Use permits would be subsequently considered by the Planning Commission for phases of development. • Property is an infill site, so annexation not required. Agilent Property Current Status/Next Steps • Preliminary Development Plan has not been received, so complexity of project is not yet known. • Once Preliminary Development Plan received, will be reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council and comments provided to be used by applicant in development of Final development Plan. 13 City Center Current Status/Next 'Steps • The area is currently a mixture of developed parcels and vacant sites. Projects within the area are'reviewed on a case-by-case basis for consistency with the Concept Plan. • Two recent developments have been approved in area: •CentreVille — 76 units with live/work and commercial components at NW corner State Farm Dr./Padre Parkway (City Center Dr.) Under construction. -The Arbors — 56 unit affordable Burbank Housing project with commercial frontage. In plan check. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING! ! ! ..and I hope this was informative 14 J S a Council: - j'Y1��c�-H,nq� Misc TO: Steve Donley, City Manager Agee Copy E CC: City Council Copy Planning Commission Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Ron Bendorff, Senior Planner PLANNING DATE: July 13, 2005 DIVISION 11 SUBJECT: General Plan and Housing Element Update Back round. The Rohnert Park General Plan was adopted in July 2000 and is intended to direct the City's growth and development until the year 2020. In the interim there have been a number of actions that have indirect and direct impacts on the continued implementation of the General Plan, including the following: 1. Submittal of Specific Plans for the Northeast, Northwest, Southeast, and < University District areas. 2:. ; Continued processing of the Wilfred/Dowdell Specific Plan. 3. Submittal of a final development plan for the Stadium Area. 4. Potential for redevelopment of the Agilent campus with a pedestrian - oriented community. 5. Adoption of the City's Water Supply Assessment. 6. Adoption of the City's Public Facilities Financing Plan. 7. Update of the City's traffic model for consistency with the County's traffic model. 8. Completion of the Sewer System Model Study. 9. _ Completion of the Storm Water Management Plan. 10. Participation in the Countywide Climate Protection Campaign. 11. Contraction of the City's Sphere of Influence in the southeast area. Given the above, a focused Update of the General Plan is in order. This Update is intended to be more of a technical "clean-up" of the existing General Plan, rather than a complete rewrite of that document. Staff notes that the next revision of the City's Housing Element is due to the State by June 30, 2007, so the _ proposed update of the General Plan should also include the required Housing Element revision. The following section indicates what elements of the 2000 General Plan should be updated. 1 Areas to be Updated Land Use and Growth Management l The overall land use designations for the majority of the City's -Sphere of Influence are not intended to be modified .with the proposed Update, as the Specific Plans that have been submitted follow these designations and respect the maximum densities specified for each designation. The Specific Plans that have been submitted do propose some reconfigurations of the designations within each area, however. It is expected that most, if not all of these Specific Plans will be acted upon prior to the completion of the General Plan Update, so any reconfigurations that are approved would be incorporated in the Update. It should also be noted that the appropriate environmental documentation is being prepared for each Specific Plan, so this information would assist in the preparation of the CEQA document for the Update. There are two areas of potential development that were not included in the 2000 General Plan: the Stadium Area and the Agilent Campus. A final development plan for the former has been submitted and the required environmental impact report (EIR) is currently in preparation. This plan would convert the existing Public/ Institutional designation to Planned Development to allow for commercial, industrial, and residential development at the former stadium site and the adjacent City -owned properties. The owners of the Agilent site plan to change the property's existing Industrial designation to allow its redevelopment as a Planned Development combining commercial, residential, and mixed-use activities. A preliminary development plan has not yet been submitted, however, so the extent of the changes is unknown. The Growth Management Element does not appear to require substantial revision, as it is based upon Measure "N", which was approved by the voters in 2000. Certain policies/goals could be removed or modified to reflect actions taken since 2000 (e.g. Policy GM -1 speaks to the preparation and adoption of a Growth Management Ordinance, which has already been accomplished.) Community Design This element appears, for the most part, to be fairly up to date, so revisions should be minimal. Depending on the actions taken in approving the Specific Plans, modifications may be required to the policies/ goals that relate to these Plans. 2 Transportation As noted above, the traffic model used for the 2000 General Plan has been updated to reflect recent development in the City and to be consistent with the County of Sonoma's new traffic model. The Transportation Element should be revised using this updated model. Open Space, Parks, and Public Facilities Includes Open Space, Parks, Schools, Wastewater, and Water Supply and Conservation. The open space section has already been updated to reference the Community Separator mitigation program agreed to by the City and the County of Sonoma, so revisions should be minimal. The parks section should be modified to eliminate references to the now -defunct Rohnert Park Stadium; however the remainder seems fairly up-to-date. The schools section similarly seems relevant, with possible changes needed to the section on school district boundaries as required by changes related to the Specific Plans. Substantial changes to the Wastewater and Water Supply and Conservation sections are needed. The former speaks to the need to perform a detailed evaluation of the wastewater capacity needs of General Plan buildout and this study has been completed, so its findings should be incorporated in the General Plan Update. This section should also be updated to include the Sewer Interceptor Project and to reflect the City's agreement with the County of Sonoma regarding the provision of wastewater service to the Canon Manor West area. The existing Water section should be completely revised to reflect the findings of the Water Supply Assessment. Given its importance to the City's future development, the Council may wish to consider rewriting the Water Supply and Conservation section as a separate General Plan Element, as the County of Sonoma is doing in its General Plan Update. Environmental Conservation Includes Historic and Archaeological Resources, Habitat and Biological Resources, Water Quality, and Air Quality. The Historic and Archaeological Resources section appears fairly up-to-date, but the surveys done for the Specific. Plan areas -should be incorporated as. an update to some of the information presented. The Habitat and Biological Resources section should be substantially revised to incorporate the surveys done for the Specific Plan areas and to reflect the California Tiger Salamander Conservation Strategy being prepared for Sonoma County. The Water Quality section appears up-to-date. The Air Quality section will have to be modified in light of the new traffic model and the associated impacts from traffic, as well as from changes to the nature of certain 3 land uses (e.g. the potential conversion of the Agilent Campus from industrial use to residential, . commercial, and mixed-use development. The City's participation in the Countywide Climate Protection Campaign should also be incorporated in the Update. Health and Safety Includes Seismic and Geologic Hazards, Drainage, Erosion, Stormwater and Flooding, Solid Waste Management and Recycling, Hazardous Materials, and Emergency Management. With the exception of the Seismic and Geologic Hazards section, this Element should be updated to reflect changes since 2000 (e.g. preparation of the Storm Water Management Plan, update. of City's emergency management plan.) Noise The traffic model update has changed the 1 estimated traffic along roadways within Rohnert Park and this requires anupdate to the Noise Element to determine commensurate increases/ decreases in sound levels. The goals and policies still appear to be relevant, however. Housing Element State Law has changed since the adoption of the current Housing Element, necessitating a complete revision of this Element. Environmental Review It is anticipated that the Update will require an EIR under CEQA. Timeframe Given that the Update is seen as a technical "clean-up" and is not intended to substantially change the land uses identified in the existing General Plan, much of the required information currently exists in various forms, such as the Water Supply Assessment and the City's revised traffic model. The availability of this information should help reduce the time needed to prepare the Update. It is therefore estimated that the process will take approximately 12 to 18 months to complete. 4 oil TO: Steve Donley, City Managr� """""4M1%M"Wn5 CC: City Council C to: Planning Commission co ta: Parks and Recreation Commission FROM: Ron Bendorff, Senior Planner PLANNING DATE: July 13, 2005 DIVISION SUBJECT. Roles of City Council, Planning Commission, and Parks and Recreation Commission in Reviewing Development Proposals The following is a brief summary of each body's primary roles in the review and approval of larger development projects, such as the Specific Plans and the Planned Development Districts: City Council ■ Certify environmental document for overall project, which will most likely be an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). ■ Adopt Specific Plan or Final Development Plan (Planned Development) for project, including design guidelines. ■ . Approve any General Plan Amendments required for Specific Plan or Final Development Plan. ■ Approve Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps. ■ Approve Development Area Plan for a Specific Plan Area (includes one or more phases of the overall project.) ■ Approve a Development Agreement for the project, if desired. ■ Initiate Annexation request to Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and, if approved by LAFCO, subsequently formalize annexation. Planning Commission . ■ Hold Scoping Session and Public Comment Meeting for an EIR. ■ Make recommendations to City Council on: o Specific Plan or Final Development Plan (Planned Development) for project. o General Plan Amendments required for Specific Plan or Final Development Plan. o Tentative Subdivision Map. o Development Area Plan for a Specific Plan Area o Development Agreement. o Annexation request to LAFCO. ■ Approve Use Permits for individual phases of Final Development Plans. 1 OVEK -I• Parks and Recreation Commission ■ Make General Plan consistency statements for park sites within proposed Specific Plans and Final Development Plans. ■ Make recommendations to City Council on adequacy and designs of proposed park sites at time of Tentative Subdivision Map review. ■ Make recommendations to City Council on use of in -lieu fees, improvement credits, private open space credits, and other fees for development projects to offset acreage. PJ City of Rohnert Park Page ES -1 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final Executive Summary ES.1 Purpose This Water Supply Assessment (WSA) has been prepared to assist the City of Rohnert Park (City) in satisfying the requirements of Senate Bill 610 (SB 610) and City Resolution Number 2004-95 (The Water Policy Resolution). The stated intent of SB 610 is to strengthen the process by which local agencies determine the adequacy and sufficiency of current and future water supplies to meet current and future demands. The WSA • Provides information on the City's water supplies consistent with Water Code Sections 10620 et. seq. (the Urban Water Management Act) and 10910 et. seq. (Water Supply Planning to Support Existing and Planned Future Uses); • Provides information on current water demands and projected water demands based on the City's General Plan and" specific project proposals currently under review by the City; • Compares water supplies and water demands for the normal, single dry and multiple dry years; • Provides the data to make the sufficiency findings required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City has commissioned the preparation of this WSA in its role as Lead Agency under CEQA.for various planned development projects. Table ES -1, on the following page, provides an index of the requirements for Water Supply Assessments and the location of each required discussion in this report. ES.2 Approval The City Council may approve the WSA, after hearing all testimony and evidence presented at a hearing. Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may determine, based on the entire record, whetherprojected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the demands of proposed projects, in addition. to existing and planned future uses. The City must include the assessment in the environmental documents prepared for designated projects pursuant to the CEQA. ES.3 Projects Under Consideration The WSA includes water demands that will occur as the City reaches buildout under its General Plan. Because the City uses groundwater, the WSA considers the demands of other pumpers in the groundwater basin. The WSA is triggered by six planning applications that meet the definition of a "project" under SB 610 or that require review under the Water Policy Resolution or both. These six projects include • University District Specific Plan Area Development • Northeast Specific Plan Area Development • Southeast Specific Plan Area Development • Northwest Specific Plan Area Development • Wilfred Dowdell Specific Plan Area Development Stadium Lands Development 01/14/2005 w } City of Rohnert Park Page ES -2 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final Table ES -1 Index of SB 610 Requirements Required Bement Location in Document Description of Service Area Section 22 Population Projections in 5 fear Increments Table 4-1 Description and 0janitification of Water Supplies Sonoma County Water Agency Supply Section 2. Recycled Water Supply Section 2. Groundwater Supply Section Description of Supply Reliability to Climatic Conditions Sonoma County Water Agency Supply Section 2. Recycled Water Supply Section 2.4� Groundwater Supply Section 3 Description of Contingency Plans Sections 2.3, 4.4* Description of Demand Ntanagernent Potential Section 4.4 Description of Conjunctive Use Potential Section 5.5 Projection of Water Demands in 5 -year Increments Table 4-2 Description of Projects & Programs Uridertaken to meet Demands Section 5.6 Description of Demand Management Measures Employed Section 4.4 ** * Contingency Planning Discission incorporates the 2000 Urban Water Management Ran by SCWA as allowed by SB 610 — Demand Management Discussion incorporates City's reporting urider the CUWCC NM as allotted by SB610 Requirements for Water Supply Assessment that involve Groundwater Required Element Location in Document Discussion of adopted Groundwater Managemient Plans Section 3.1.1 Description of the groundwater basin Section 3.2, 3.3,3.5,3.6,' .3,3.5,3.6, 3 Description of arry court orders that affect legal rights to pump Section 3.1.1 Information on condition of the basin and efforts limit overdraft Section 3.5,3.E Detatiled description and analysis of pumping over past 5 years Section 3. Analyis of the sufficiency of the groundwater basin to meet demands Section 3. Additional Requirements for Water Supply Assessments prepared by the Lead Agency under CEQA Required Bement Location in Documer Determination of Supply Sufficiency under Normal, Single & Multiple Dry Years Tables 5-1 and 5-: Identification of Water Supply Entitlements & Rights and water received under rights Sonoma County Water Agency Supply Secticn 2. Recycled Water Supply Section 2., Groundwater Supply Section Description of groundwater basin and information regarding overdraft Section Analysis of the sufficiency of the groundwater basin to meet demands Section 3. Information related to capital outlay programs for financing delivery of water supply Section 5. information on permits needed and regulatory requirements associated with water supply • Section 5. 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park Page ES -3 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final ESA Summary of Supplies The City has three sources of water supply. These are the Sonoma County Water Agency's System, recycled water and local groundwater. ES.4.1 Sonoma County Water Agency The Sonoma County Water Agency's (Agency's) Russian River System is described in detail in the Agency's 2000 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which in accordance with SB 610 is incorporated by reference. As part of developing the 2000 UW -W, the Agency updated its operations model which predicts the amount of water available to its system in a Normal Year, a Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Years. The Agency has a current water right of 75,000 acre-feet per year (AFY). Table ES -2 presents a summary of the supply available to Agency's system and the Agency's rights and illustrates that currently the Agency, has more water available to its system, even in dry years; than it has the right to divert. Table ES -2 Agency Supply under Various Hydrologic Conditions `2000 Urban Water Management Plan Table 6-1. The Agency provides wholesale water supply to eight Prime Contractors (Forestville Water'District, Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cotati, Petaluma, Sonoma, North Marin Water District and Valley of the Moon Water District, hereinafter the Contractors). The Eleventh Amended Agreement for Water Supply (11th Amended Agreement) describes the business relationship between the Agency and its Contractors including each Contractors' allocation of water. The City has an allocation of 7,500 AFY and a peak month pumping allocation of 15.0 million gallons per day (mgd) under the 11th Amended Agreement. The I Iffi Amended Agreement is premised on the completion of the Agency's Water Supply and Transmission System Project (the WSTSP) which was planned in the 1990's. The WSTSP included numerous improvements to the Agency's system and increase in total water rights from 75,000 AFY to 101,000 AFY. Due to both legal challenges and changes in circumstances, Agency's Board of Directors has elected to prepare a new EIR that will provide the public and decision -makers with an 01/14/2005 Total Agency Supply Under Various Conditions (AFY) Supply' Available to the Agency's System Normal Water Year 211,945 Single Dry Water Year 86,955 Multiple Dry Water Year 1 126,885 Multiple Dry Water Year -2 126,685 Multiple Dry Water Year 3 126,485 Permitted Water Rights Current 75,000 `2000 Urban Water Management Plan Table 6-1. The Agency provides wholesale water supply to eight Prime Contractors (Forestville Water'District, Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cotati, Petaluma, Sonoma, North Marin Water District and Valley of the Moon Water District, hereinafter the Contractors). The Eleventh Amended Agreement for Water Supply (11th Amended Agreement) describes the business relationship between the Agency and its Contractors including each Contractors' allocation of water. The City has an allocation of 7,500 AFY and a peak month pumping allocation of 15.0 million gallons per day (mgd) under the 11th Amended Agreement. The I Iffi Amended Agreement is premised on the completion of the Agency's Water Supply and Transmission System Project (the WSTSP) which was planned in the 1990's. The WSTSP included numerous improvements to the Agency's system and increase in total water rights from 75,000 AFY to 101,000 AFY. Due to both legal challenges and changes in circumstances, Agency's Board of Directors has elected to prepare a new EIR that will provide the public and decision -makers with an 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park City-wide Water Supply Assessment Page ES -4 Final environmental document that not only addresses legal deficiencies but also more closely reflects the Agency's and its customers' current water supply circumstances. This direction defined a new project, the Water Supply, Transmission, and Reliability Project, commonly referred to as the Water Project. The Agency's water rights decision requires a reduction in diversions of 30% when the volume of water stored in Lake Sonoma is less than 100,000 AF. It is unlikely this cut in diversions would be triggered after a single dry year.' However, if the Agency saw indications that a hydrologic cycle similar to either the single or multiple dry years was . beginning, it is likely that Agency would work with its contractors to implement water shortage provisions consistent with Section 3.5 of the 11 `h Amended Agreement in order to avoid the need for immediate large cutbacks. Section 3.5 of the 111h Amended Agreement provides a qualitative description of water allocation provisions not numerical allocations.. Because there is no formally adopted numerical allocation of water, the WSA estimates water supply available from the Agency in single dry year will be 70% of the City's allocation or 5,250 AFY. (A 30% curtailment, while unlikely, is used). The analysis estimates water supply available from the Agency in multiple dry years will be 80% of the City's allocation or 6,000 AFY consistent with the contingency plan developed in the UWMP. Table ES -3 presents a summary of the water available to the Agency's system in normal, single and multiple dry years and how this water is anticipated to be allocated to the City given the Agency's current and proposed water rights and the agreements between the Agency and its Contractors. 'Personal Communication, Christopher Murray, Sonoma County Water Agency 'Incremental Recycled Water Program —Recycled Water Master Plan, February 2004. 01114/2005 hill The Agency and its Contractors have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Water Transmission System Capacity Allocation During Temporary Impairment (Temporary Impairment MOU) which went into effect in March of 2001 and expires in September of 2005. The Agency and its contractors are currently negotiating a new MOU, Under the Temporary Impairment MOU, the City's peak month allocation is reduced t6'5:3 mgd. Notwithstanding the City's contracted water allocation of 7,500 AFY and taking into account the Agency's water rights, the current condition of the Agency's. system, the City's plans and the plans of other water contractors as represented to the Agency, the City is basing this Water Supply Assessment on receipt of 6,476 AFY from the Agency's _ system during the Normal Water Year. This figure is consistent with the City's recent communications to the Agency regarding its development plans and potential for recycled water use. The Agency's water rights decision requires a reduction in diversions of 30% when the volume of water stored in Lake Sonoma is less than 100,000 AF. It is unlikely this cut in diversions would be triggered after a single dry year.' However, if the Agency saw indications that a hydrologic cycle similar to either the single or multiple dry years was . beginning, it is likely that Agency would work with its contractors to implement water shortage provisions consistent with Section 3.5 of the 11 `h Amended Agreement in order to avoid the need for immediate large cutbacks. Section 3.5 of the 111h Amended Agreement provides a qualitative description of water allocation provisions not numerical allocations.. Because there is no formally adopted numerical allocation of water, the WSA estimates water supply available from the Agency in single dry year will be 70% of the City's allocation or 5,250 AFY. (A 30% curtailment, while unlikely, is used). The analysis estimates water supply available from the Agency in multiple dry years will be 80% of the City's allocation or 6,000 AFY consistent with the contingency plan developed in the UWMP. Table ES -3 presents a summary of the water available to the Agency's system in normal, single and multiple dry years and how this water is anticipated to be allocated to the City given the Agency's current and proposed water rights and the agreements between the Agency and its Contractors. 'Personal Communication, Christopher Murray, Sonoma County Water Agency 'Incremental Recycled Water Program —Recycled Water Master Plan, February 2004. 01114/2005 hill City of Rohnert Park City-wide Water Supply Assessment Table ES -3 Summary of Agency Water Supply Page ES -5 Final * Supply Contracted to the City under 11th Amended Agreement ** Agency's Current Water Right *** Estimate based on City Analysis of April 1, 2004 Data ES.4.2 Recycled Water Rohnert The City is the largest urban recycled water user in Sonoma County with a current average use of over 1,000 AFY. Planned recycled water use will reach over 1,300 AFY.: Total Park Agency Supply Under Various Conditions (AF)9 Supply Supply Available to the Agency's System private and public properties to receive recycled water. In addition the Community Normal Water Year 211,945 7500* associated with the Specific Plan Areas will use recycled water. The City is actively entertaining proposals to use recycled water for residential irrigation purposes within Single Dry Water Year 86,955 5,250 Multiple Dry Water Year 1 126,885 6,000 Multiple Dry Water Year 2 126,685 6,000 Multiple Dry Water Year 3 126,485 6,000 Current Water Supply System Conditions 75000** 6476*'* * Supply Contracted to the City under 11th Amended Agreement ** Agency's Current Water Right *** Estimate based on City Analysis of April 1, 2004 Data The Subregional System has a great deal of operational flexibility and the'system is able to reliably deliver recycled water to customers under a the full range of hydrologic conditions. This is principally accomplished by reducing discharge of recycled water during drier hydrologic cycles. ES.4.3 Groundwater The City pumps groundwater from 42 wells located in the Laguna de Santa Rosa watershed of the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin. All wells are located inside the City limits. Groundwater. supply sufficiency was evaluated for a study area that encompasses the upper portion of. the Laguna de Santa Rosa watershed (above the Stony.Point Road gauge). The 2004 Water Policy Resolution 01/14/2005 I i ES.4.2 Recycled Water The City is the largest urban recycled water user in Sonoma County with a current average use of over 1,000 AFY. Planned recycled water use will reach over 1,300 AFY.: Ex ansion to the City's recycled waters stem has been documented in the Incremental Recycled Water Program EIR prepared by the Subregional Water Recycling System' Expansion of the recycled water system will enable additional schools, parks, and other private and public properties to receive recycled water. In addition the Community Fields, described in the General Plan and all new parks and irrigated. buffer areas associated with the Specific Plan Areas will use recycled water. The City is actively entertaining proposals to use recycled water for residential irrigation purposes within each of the Specific Plan Aieas further offsetting demands on either the Agency supply or groundwater supply. The City has adopted a Water Waste .Ordinance which requires the use of recycled water when it is, available and of appropriate quality. The Subregional System has a great deal of operational flexibility and the'system is able to reliably deliver recycled water to customers under a the full range of hydrologic conditions. This is principally accomplished by reducing discharge of recycled water during drier hydrologic cycles. ES.4.3 Groundwater The City pumps groundwater from 42 wells located in the Laguna de Santa Rosa watershed of the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin. All wells are located inside the City limits. Groundwater. supply sufficiency was evaluated for a study area that encompasses the upper portion of. the Laguna de Santa Rosa watershed (above the Stony.Point Road gauge). The 2004 Water Policy Resolution 01/14/2005 I i ;4 City Rohnert Park of Page ES -6 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final specifies that new projects will not be approved if they contribute to the City exceeding an- average annual groundwater*pumping rate of 2.3 mgd (2,577 AFY). This WSA considers 2,577 AFY as the amount of groundwater available to the City for the sufficiency analysis. The City's wells are located in a very complex aquifer system. Well ,profiles were used to - f divide the aquifer into four vertical zones, which do not represent laterally extensive aquifers but are strictly depth based for purposes of evaluating hydrogeologic conditions. The vertical zones of the aquifer system were designated: • shallow (0 to 200 foot depth); • intermediate (200 to 600 foot depth), deep (600 to 800 foot depth), and lower (depths greater than 800 feet). All of the City's wells are perforated primarily in the intermediate zone. ES 4.3.1 Groundwater Pumpage _ City pumpage data from 1970 to the present and pumpage data and estimates from other pumpers in the basin were evaluated to determine the relationship between historical groundwater Ievel trends and the total pumpage in the study area. Annual pumpage data were obtained for Sonoma State University (SSU) and the City of Cotati. Pumpage estimates for 1970 through 2003 were derived for private, commercial, and agricultural pumpers based on population census data, planned, land use, and/or water use estimates because metered data are not available. In 2003, total City pumpage was 3,556 AFY and the estimate of pumpage from all other pumpers in the study area is 3,522 AFY. One of the requirements for a WSA is an evaluation of water supply sufficiency based on a 20 -year projection_ Future pumpage was projected to 2025, and it was assumed that build -out of the Specific Plan -Areas would have occurred by that time. The maximum City pumpage in 2025 was assumed to be 2,577 AFY, consistent with the 2004 Water Policy Resolution. Based on data provided by'other public agencies, pumpage from the City:of Cotati and SSU Is projected to increase from approximately 412' to 602 AFY. Agricultural pumpage was assumed to remain at 2003 levels (about 1,400 AFY). Private and commercial pumpage are projected to experience the largest increase, from about 1,700 to 2,760 AFY. The total 2025 projected pumpage for the study area (City and non City) is 7,350 AFY, a slight increase (approximately 270 AFY) from the total current pumpage but a notable decrease from recent historical pumping (i.e., average pumpage during 1990-1997 was 8,700 AFY)_ ES 4.3.2 Groundwater Levels Water level hydrographs constructed from the available groundwater level data were categorized according to zone(s) of predominant completion in order to assess water level trends by zone. Hydrographs for most shallow zone wells located near the City exhibit a stable long-term groundwater level trend from about 1975 to present. Regardless of increases or decreases in pumpage in the central Rohnert Park area, or the occurrence of dry, normal, or wet 0111.412005 ;4 City of Rohnert Park Page ES -7 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final years, spring water levels in the shallow zone generally showed little response to changed conditions. Groundwater levelsin Agency monitoring wells located outside the study area declined by about two to three feet during the 1987-1991 dry period. Groundwater levels subsequently recovered during the 1994-1998 wet period. Hydrographs for intermediate zone wells, from which the majority of the City's pumpage occurs, show that changes in pumpage have a greater effect on intermediate zone groundwater levels than changes in climatic conditions (i.e., water year type). Spring groundwater elevations in the central Rohnert Park wells were generally stable from 1977 to 1981, gFclined from 1982 to 1990 as pumpage increased, and gradually increased from 1990 to 1997 when pumpage for the study area averaged about 8,700 AFY. Groundwater levels were stable from 1997 to 2003 and exhibited a marked recovery when total pumpage decreased to about 7,100 AFY in 2003. Water level recovery since 1990 indicates.that the water level decline during 1982 to 1990 was not an indication of overdraft conditions. There is also no indication.of generally declining groundwater levels elsewhere in the subbasin in any zone, i.e., there is no indication that overdraft has occurred on a subbasin scale. Groundwater elevation contours for Spring 2004 were ,prepared for the shallow and intermediate zones. The shape of the shallow zone contours and directions of groundwater flow are similar to those shown for 1951 (Cardwell, 1958)_ The direction of groundwater flow in the shallow Zone in the Rohnert Park area is generally westerly, and there is groundwater outflow in this zone to the rest of the Santa Rosa Plain. The data also indicate a groundwater divide in the. general vicinity of the watershed boundary. North of this divide, the direction of groundwater flow is generally northwesterly and toward the City. South of the divide, the groundwater flow direction in the Petaluma Valley Groundwater Basin is southeasterly toward Petaluma. Groundwater elevations for the intermediate and deeper zones in Spring 2004 in the central and western portions of the City are significantly lower than in the shallow zone. The direction of groundwater flow is generally toward the City and toward a .cone of depression present beneath the western portion of the City. Unlike the shallow zone, the intermediate zone groundwater elevation contours show a gradient for inflow into the study area from the west. . ES.4.3.3 Groundwater Quality Groundwater produced from City wells meets primary state drinking water standards. Overall mineral content, as indicated by specific conductance (electrical conductance; EC), ranges from 270 to 620 µmhos/cm, while the average EC levels are 300 Amhos/cm. in intermediate zone wells, and about 430 µmhos/cm in wells completed in multiple zones. All EC values are below the recommended secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 900 µmhos/cm. No_ serious or widespread issues that affect. community water supplies due to organic chemical sources are known to be present in the City. 01/14/2005 ' In order to update the DWR recharge analysis, Geographic Information System (GIS) ' City of Rohnert Park Page ES -8 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final Areas. New development involves buildings, paving, and other features that affect ES.4.3.4 Soil Recharge Characteristics In 1975 and 1982, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR, 1975 and 1982) ' assessed areas of natural recharge in Sonoma County. Based on soil recharge M characteristics (primarily soil permeability and slope), and mapping of these characteristics by three broad categories using criteria similar to those developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), less than five percent of the WSA study area would be classified as a "recharge area" (the category with the highest recharge potential). The USGS and DWR recharge classifications are useful for identifying areas with the highest recharge rates, but these classifications oversimplified recharge conditions by ignoring much of the variability in soil permeability and slope within the study area. ' In order to update the DWR recharge analysis, Geographic Information System (GIS) ' techniques were used for the WSA to delineate areas with different recharge properties based on -soil characteristics and topography. The updated information was then used to assess the potential loss of recharge due to proposed development of the Specific Plan Areas. New development involves buildings, paving, and other features that affect groundwater recharge. Areas with the highest recharge rates occur east of the City primarily along streambeds, at the heads of alluvial fans., and on some portions of the Sonoma Volcanics. In contrast, soils beneath the City are predominantly Clear Lake M Clays with low permeability and poor recharge characteristics. The City's General Plan specifies that future development within the Urban Growth Boundary will incorporate buffer areas and open space along the three creek corridors where recharge occurs. Thus, protective measures have been incorporated in the General Plan, its Environmental Impact Report and its Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the affect on areas of high recharge is anticipated to be minimal. ES.4.3.5 Groundwater Recharge. Estimates Previously, estimates of groundwater recharge in Sonoma County have been developed by various methods. For purposes of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Rohnert Park General Plan, PES Environmental, Inc. (PES) developed a groundwater flow model that was used to estimate recharge for a 17,700 acre study area that included the City (Dyett & Bhatia, 2000). The PES model was based -on a simplified conceptualization of the aquifer system; from the model results, PES estimated that the average annual recharge rate during 1970-1999 was 1.6 mgd (about 1,800 AFY). This was a low estimate due to many factors, including model boundaries that exclude most of the areas with the highest recharge potential in the WSA study area. Subsequently, Todd Engineers prepared a water budget for a study area almost identical. to that used for the groundwater portion of this WSA (Todd, 2004). This water budget was prepared for the Canon Manor West DEIR and provided a comprehensive estimate of all inflows to and outflows from the study area during 1986-2001. The Todd water budget includes recharge from direct precipitation, streams, irrigation return flows, and septic systems. The average annual groundwater recharge for the study area during the 1986-2001 period of analysis was estimated to be about 8,300 AFY. 01/14/2005 i ? City of Rohnert Park Page ES -9 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final The analysis of the relationship between groundwater levels and pumpage conducted for the WSA resulted in an estimated average recharge rate of at least 8,400 AFY during 1990-1997, a period of stable to slightly increasing groundwater levels. Since 1990-1997 was a wetter than average period, the long-term average recharge rate would be expected to be less than 8,400 AFY. The WSA estimate is similar to. the recharge estimate derived from the Todd water budget for 1986-2001. The evaluation of groundwater conditions and supply sufficiency for this WSA demonstrates that the groundwater supplies available during normal, single -dry, .and multiple -dry years within a 20 -year projection will meet the projected demand associated with the proposed subdivisions, in addition to existing and other planned groundwater uses in the study area. ES 4.4 Summary of Available Supplies Table ES -4 below, summarizes the water supplies available to the City under a range of hydrologic conditions. This summary includes the City's estimate of Agency allocation under current water supply conditions. Table ES -4 Total Water Supply Available to the City . ES.4.3.6 Groundwater Sufficiency Analyses of the historical groundwater level and pumpage data have allowed the development of an estimated range of pumpage within which the City and other pumpers Supply in the study area could operate without causing persistent groundwater level declines. Based on evaluation of historical groundwater levels and pumpage, the estimated total Total Mer &*py AvwlaUe to City in AFY watershed pumpage that would not be expected to cause long-term groundwater declines _... ranges from 7,100 to 8,700 AFY. The projected total 2025 study area pumpage is 7,350 Allocation AFY, with 2,577 AFY of that pumpage projected for use by the City as one of the 6,476 sources of supply to meet its 20 -year water demands. The projected total 2025 pumpage - 1 is a slight increase from the total current pumpage but is less than recent historical 4� pumping. As a result, the projected 2025 pumpage falls within the range of historically Recycled Water sustainable pumpage. The evaluation of groundwater conditions and supply sufficiency for this WSA demonstrates that the groundwater supplies available during normal, single -dry, .and multiple -dry years within a 20 -year projection will meet the projected demand associated with the proposed subdivisions, in addition to existing and other planned groundwater uses in the study area. ES 4.4 Summary of Available Supplies Table ES -4 below, summarizes the water supplies available to the City under a range of hydrologic conditions. This summary includes the City's estimate of Agency allocation under current water supply conditions. Table ES -4 Total Water Supply Available to the City . 01/14/2005 a rent Vtfater Supply S0910 Full Agency Total Mer &*py AvwlaUe to City in AFY Carxf6om Dy Year AMpleDWYears Allocation Smana County Water AWYy 6,476 . 5,250 6,000 6,000 6,000 7,500 Recycled Water 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 Groundwater 2,577 '2,5TT 2,577 2,577 Z577 2,577 Totalsl 10,355 9,129 9,879 9,879 9,879 11,379 01/14/2005 4 City of Rohnert Park Page ES -10 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final ES.5 Summary of Demands In 2000, the City adopted its General Plan. The General Plan sets land -use patterns and NII population goals. The City is anticipating potential development within five designated . Specific Plan Areas (SPAs); the Northwest Area, the Wilfred-Dowdell Area, the Northeast Area, the University District and the Southeast Area. In addition, the City is anticipating infill development, consisting largely of non-residential land uses. The City has an adopted Growth Management. Ordinance that is intended to provide for orderly build -out of residential development over the General Plan planning horizon. In its simplest form, the Growth Management Ordinance has the effect of limiting the number of residential building permits issued to 225 per year. Population and Demand projections reflect the rate of development allowed by the Growth Management Ordinance. Table ES -5 below presents the anticipated development pattern in 5 -year . increments from 2005 until 2025. Table ES -5 Projected Development Pattern Customer Type Unit Current 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 SFR Detached EA 7,492 7,492 8,352 8,737 8,993 8,993 SFR Attached EA 3,039 3,039 3,518 3,631 3,744 3,744 MFR & Mobile EA 6,035 6,035 6,696 7,336 7,867 7,867 Com rdRetail AC 311 322 407 437 467 467 Industrial AC 320 328 371 436 500 500 Office AC 47 47 54 68 77 77 Public AC 93 93 93 93 93 93 Subtotal Irrigation -potable AC 70 70 28 28 28 28 Irrigation -recycled AC 452 452 • 536 546 546 546 Projected water demands are based on the unit demand rates consistent with existing City data and good engineering practices. Demand classes are consistent with guidance provided by Department of Water Resources for SB 610 reporting. The City is a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council's MOU and is actively engaged in water conservation efforts. The City expects to see a 10% voluntary reduction in overall demands throughout the buildout cycle, consistent with conservation implementation.* Table ES -6 reflects water demands under normal conditions. 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park City-wide Water Supply Assessment Table ES -6 Water Demand Projections Page ES -11 Final Custoaw Type Unit Cun eM* 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 SFR Detached AFY 3,241 3,241 3285 3,437 3,538 3,538 SFRAttached AFY 983 983 1,115 1,145 1,181 1,181 IVFR&Mobile AFY 1,009 1,076 1,171 1,275 1,368 1,368 Corrrr►Retailr, AFY 680 704890 955 1,021 1,021 Industrial AFY .524 53 607 714 819 819 Office AFY 51 51 74 84 84 Public AFY 102 102 102 102 102 102 Subtotal 6,591 6,694 7,229 7,702 8,112 8,112 Imgalimpotable AFY 159 159 85 85 85 nigation-recycled AFY 1,040 1,040 1,256 1,302 1,302 1,302 The City has adopted an Ordinance establishing a Water Shortage Emergency Plan. This ordinance provides for 20% and 30% reductions as necessary to respond to curtailed supply in the event of a drought. Table ES -7 outlines the anticipated water. demands at General Plan buildout for the normal water year and with the 20% and 30% curtailments Table ES -7 Water Demands with Demand Management Water Demands with Management Demand at Buildout 20% Reduction 30% Reduction Water Demand in AFY Total Non -Irrigation Demands 8,112 7,301 6,490 Irrigation from the Potable System 85 76 68 Irri ation'from the Recycled Water System 1,3021 1,3021 1,302 Total -9,4991 8,6791 7,859 ES.6 Sufficiency The groundwater analysis confirms the groundwater supply is sufficient to meet City demands and those of other pumpers in the basin. The City intends to pursue a conjunctive use strategy with its three supply sources. During Normal and Above Normal Water years under this strategy, the City would meet demands using its Agency allocation and recycled water first, minimizing its demands on groundwater and allowing the groundwater basin to recharge during these periods. In dry and multiple dry years, the City will continue to use recycled water to the maximum extent possible. During these periods, the City anticipates some cutbacks in its Agency allocation may occur as provided for under the I I `h Amended Agreement. The 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park Page ES -12 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final City will implement demand curtailment measures consistent with its Water Shortage Emergency Plan and the City will utilize its groundwater resources. Table ES -8 provides supply and demand information for the Normal Water Year in 5 -year increments from 2005 to 2025, This analysis is presented reflecting the impaired condition of the Agency's system for the entire planning period. Table ES -8 Normal Year Sufficiency Analysis Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison Afinent' 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Water Demand in AFY Total Non -Irrigation Demands 8,112 6,490 7,301 Total Non -Irrigation Demands 6,591 6,694 7,229 7,702 8,112 8,112 Irrigation from the Potable System 159 159 85 85 85 85 Irrigation from the Recycled Water System 1,040 1,040 1256 1,302 1,302 1,302 Total 7,789 7,893 8,570 9,088 9,499 9,499 Water Supplies in AFY 6,000 6,000 6,000 Groundwater Supply 2,577 2,577 SCWA Supply 3,194 6,476 6,476 6,476 6,476 6,476 Group water Supply 3,556 2,577 2,577 2,577 2,577 2,577 Recycled Water Supply 1,040 1,040 1,256 1,302 1,302 1,302 Total 7,790 10,093 10,309 _ 10,355 10,355 10,355 Sufficiency (Supply Less Demand) 01 2,2W 11,7391 1,2b7i a561 856 Cturent Sufflaency UaIcUation reflects actual tierrwxt and aauai suppy mrougn uemmer luu s. Table ES -9 outlines the supply and demand patterns at buildout under Normal, Single Dry and Multiple Dry Years. In all cases, supply is sufficient to meet demand. Table ES -9 Dry Year Sufficiency Analysis Dry Year Supply Demand Comparison Normal Single Dry Multiple Dry 1 2 3. Water Demand in AFY Total Non -Irrigation Demands 8,112 6,490 7,301 7,301 7,301 Irrigation from the Potable System 85 68 76 76 76 Irrigation from the Recycled Water System 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 Total 9,499 7,859 8,679 8,679 8,679 Water Supplies in AFY Agency Supply" 6,476 5,250 6,000 6,000 6,000 Groundwater Supply 2,577 2,577 2,577 2,577 .2,577 Recycled Water Supply 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302 Total 10,355 9,129 9,879 9,879 9,879 Sufficiency (Supply Less Demand) 856 1,269 l,iOOI 1,200 1,200 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park Page ES -13 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final ES.7 Actions Required to Make the Water SupplyAvailable The City has adopted a Water Waste Ordinance that prohibits waste of water and requires the use of recycled water when it is available. The City has also adopted a Water Shortage Emergency Plan Ordinance that gives it the authority to implement demand management. These policy tools are in place and can be used to achieve the demand management and recycled water supplies outlined in this assessment. The City has. approved a Public Facilities Finance Plan and adopted Mitigation Fees to Rind this construction. The plan will be revised as necessary to incorporate the full scope of the project: Work is expected to be complete in 2008. The City has initiated a number of activities to manage itsgroundwater supply and ensure supply sufficiency. These include: Y� • Decreased groundwater use and increased use of Agency water; • Expansion of its groundwater monitoring program; _ • Expansion of its water conservation program; • Continuation and expansion.of its recycled water use for irrigation; • Protection of groundwater recharge areas; • Support of the planned joint United States Geologic Survey and Agency Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin study. The Agency anticipates issuing a new Notice of Preparation for the Water Project EIR in 2005 and anticipates it .will release its Draft EIR for public review by May 2006, after. completion of its Urban Water Management Plan 2005..A Final EIR is scheduled for p g 01/14/2005 The City's water model indicates a need to extend a new water transmission main from the Agency aqueduct to the proposed East -side developments and to make several other modificatipns to the distribution system to provide adequate water service. These improvements are under design. The City has approved Mitigation Fees to fund this construction. Work is expected to be complete in 2006. - The Santa Rosa Subregional Water Reclamation System has approved a Programatic EIR for its long-term Incremental Recycled Water Program (IRWP). Expansion of the recycled water system serving Rohnert Park is included in the IRWP. The City has ® applied for a State grant to complete the planning of the recycled water system expansion. The recycled water system expansion will include the construction of a recycled water storage reservoir (with approximately 300 AF of capacity) and extension of the recycled water transmission system to connect the new reservoir to the existing recycled water system. The City is current negations with the proponents of the University District Specific Plan and the Subregional system to move forward with the project implementation. The proponents of the University District Specific Plan have acquired and are proposing to contribute a site for the reservoir. Conceptual design has also been completed by the proponents. The conceptual design and siting will be presented to.the Subregional System. The City has. approved a Public Facilities Finance Plan and adopted Mitigation Fees to Rind this construction. The plan will be revised as necessary to incorporate the full scope of the project: Work is expected to be complete in 2008. The City has initiated a number of activities to manage itsgroundwater supply and ensure supply sufficiency. These include: Y� • Decreased groundwater use and increased use of Agency water; • Expansion of its groundwater monitoring program; _ • Expansion of its water conservation program; • Continuation and expansion.of its recycled water use for irrigation; • Protection of groundwater recharge areas; • Support of the planned joint United States Geologic Survey and Agency Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin study. The Agency anticipates issuing a new Notice of Preparation for the Water Project EIR in 2005 and anticipates it .will release its Draft EIR for public review by May 2006, after. completion of its Urban Water Management Plan 2005..A Final EIR is scheduled for p g 01/14/2005 M City of Rohnert Park Page ES =14 City-wide Water Supply Assessment Final completion in May 2007, and ETR certification and project approval could be considered by the Board by the early summer of 2007. Completion of the Water Project will allow the City to access its full 7,500 AFY allocation of Agency supply.. The WSA documents that the City has adequate supply even without the completion of the Water Project. I I 01/14/2005 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Council: tPage ES - 1 Executive Summary Miscellaneous -Final CommunicationsExecutive Summary o5�`�Q n �'�Co:ESA Introduction: � The City of Rohnert Park ("City") is working to develop a comprehensive strategy for managing the costs of capital facilities, maintenance and services that are impacted by new development. The City is interested in utilizing a variety of funding mechanisms including but not limited to: • Mitigation Fees for capital improvements which can be financed on a "pay-as-you-go" basis • Bond Financing (secured by special assessments or special taxes) for capital improvements which should be completed in advance of development . Maintenance Annuity Funds for services In general, the City is working from the principle that new development needs to pay a "fair -share" of the costs it generates. The fair share analysis is generally consistent with California Government Code Section 66000 et. seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act adopted in 1989 through Assembly Bill 1600 and amended in 1996 to cover additional financing requirements. Hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). The Act requires that an agency develop a "nexus" or reasonable relationship between mitigation fees and required infrastructure. New development can only be required to pay its share of the costs; agencies must develop other funding sources for improvements or rehabilitation required for serving the existing customer base. The City is utilizing the same nexus concepts to develop a strategy for securing long-term revenue for public services and maintenance. This Public Facilities Finance Plan ("Finance Plan") includes a nexus analysis and Mitigation Fees for capital facilities. It also presents strategies for bond financing and for funding new demands for maintenance and services. ES.2 Purpose The purpose of this Finance Plan is threefold. 1. To develop a Nexus Analysis and Mitigation Fee calculation. This will allow the City to adopt Mitigation Fees in accordance with the Act. 2. To present a preliminary strategy for financing the construction of capital improvements in the early years of planned buildout. This will allow the City to construct the necessary infrastructure when it is needed to serve planned growth, while minimizing impacts to current users. 3. To develop a maintenance and services analysis for all new development and calculate the annuity required to fund the maintenance and services deficit created by residential land uses. This provides the City with the information necessary to acquire Maintenance Annuity Fund deposits from new development. ES.3 Scope of Analysis The City's General Plan sets land -use patterns and population goals. The City is anticipating potential development within five designated Specific Plan Areas: the Northwest Area, the Wilfred-Dowdell Area, the Northeast Area, the University District and the Southeast Area.. In addition, the City is anticipating infill development consisting largely of non-residential land uses. May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Executive Summary I Page ES - 2 Final This Finance Plan analyzes development impacts, mitigation fee burdens and potential bond financing programs for the following categories of capital improvements: • Roadways • Utilities • Public Safety Facilities • Utility Modeling & System Planning Studies • Public Facilities • Regional Transportation • Parks & Recreation The City is currently preparing Utility System Models and Planning Studies for its water, sewer and storm drain utilities. The City may update this Finance Plan and/or adopt additional Mitigation Fees for the water sewer and storm drain utilities when these studies are complete. This Finance Plan also analyzes the costs of general City services and maintenance associated with new development and compares that to the revenue generated from various types ofnew development. The maintenance and services analysis concludes that the costs to serve non-residential land uses are generally balanced or more than balanced by the revenue generated from these land uses. A Maintenance Annuity Deposit has been calculated to fund fiscal deficits created by residential -land uses. Because nonresidential development is fiscally neutral or positive for the City, the Finance Plan does not propose a Maintenance Annuity Deposit for these classes of land use. ESA Capital Facilities included in the Public Finance Plan In July of 2000, the City Council adopted a General Plan with a planning horizon through year 2020. The General Plan outlined projected growth and land use patterns and identified major infrastructure systems that the City would need to support these land use patterns. In July of 2002, the City Council approved a 5 -year Capital Improvement Program ("CII'") that further refined planned upgrades and modifications to the City's infrastructure for the benefit of the existing population and to support new development. This Finance Plan focuses on capital improvements identified in either.the General Plan or the CIP that meet the nexus requirements of the Act and where new development has a "fair -share" contribution. Under the Act, the City may use Mitigation Fees to finance, all or part of a CIP project, provided the City does the following: 1. Identifies the purpose of the fee. 2. Identifies the uses of the fee typically by reference to an approved Capital Improvement Program, General Plan or other public document. 3. Establishes a reasonable relationship (or nexus) between the use of the fee and the type of development. 4. Establishes a reasonable relationship (or nexus) between the need for capital improvements and the type of development. 5. Establishes a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the costs of the capital improvements. Table ES -1 (a) and (b), on the following pages, lists the improvements included in the Finance PIan and their cost estimates. The cost estimates for each improvement have been updated based on the description provided in the CIP and General Plan, information available from Specific Plan Area developers and independent cost estimating efforts. The cost estimates developed in the Finance Plan are "order of magnitude" estimates and have been developed without access to detailed design information; these estimates are accurate within +50% to -30%. In general, the cost estimates do not include new right of way. It is assumed that the needed new right-of-way, which is almost exclusively associated with roadways, will be dedicated by the adjoining May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Executive Summary Page ES - 3 Final property owners as a condition of development. This is consistent with General Plan Policy TR -4 which requires right of way dedication as a condition of development.' The exceptions to this general, rule are: • Roadway improvements to East Cotati Avenue, Seed Farm Drive and Snyder Lane south of Rohnert Park Expressway because there is no new development adjacent to these proposed improvements to dedicate right-of-way; • The new Westside Public Safety Station because the site must be acquired; • Community Fields because the site must be acquired; • The sewer main serving the Eastside Specific Plan Areas, because an existing easement must be expanded; • The Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange, because there is no new development adjacent to these proposed improvements to dedicate right-of-way. ' Our Place ... Rohnert Park 2020 A Plan for the Future, General Plan, Third Edition; adopted July 2000, pg 4-11. May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Page ES - 4 Executive Summary Final Table ES -1(a) Roadway Facilities in the Public Facilities Finance. Plan Improvement Description Total Cost New Development Share Existing Development Share Roadway Improvements & Bridges No. Name 1 Bodway Parkway (Valley House to Railroad $ 1,080,600 $ 999,800 $ 80,800 2 Commerce Blvd. (Copeland Creek to Arlen) $ 498,700 $ 286;300 $ 212,400 Bride @ Copeland Creek $ 268,000 $ 268,000 $ - 3 Dowdell Avenue widening Wilfred to 750`south $ 695,300 $ 695,300 $ 4 Dowdell Avenue extepsion 750' south of Wilfed to Business Park $ 924,100 $ 924,100 $ - Bride @ Business Park Drive $ 498,000 $ 498,000 $ - 5 East Cotati Avenue (Bodway to Petaluma Hill Road) $ 4,014,500 $ 3,460,800 $ 553,700 6 Golf Course Drive (Fairway to Country Club) $ 1,994,800 $ 565,900 $ 1,428,900 7 Keiser Avenue (Snyder to Petaluma Hill Road) $ 3,258,400 $ 3,072,000 $ 186,400 8 Rohnert Park Expressway (Snyder to Petaluma Hill Road) $ 3,518,900 $ 3,432,400 $ 86,500 9 Seed Farm Drive Rohnert Park Expressway to Enterprise) $ 1,624,000 $ 1,439,700 $ 184,300 10 Snyder Lane (G Section to Middle School) $ 2,347,400 $ 2,265,600 $ 81,800 Bridge @ Copeland Creek $ 162,000 $ 162,000 Bridge @ Crane Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 $ - 11 Snyder Lane (Middle School to Med Center Drive) $ 1,945,400 $ 1,924,900 $ 20,500 Bridge @ Five Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 12 Snyder Lane (Med Center Drive to Southwest Blvd.) $ 5,056,800 $ 5,006,400 $ 50,400 Bride @ Hinebaugh Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 $ - 13 Wilfred Avenue (1999 City Limits to Urban Growth Bound ) $ 3,310,000 $ 3,233,900 $ 76,100 Subtotal Roadways & Bridges $ 31,799,900 $ 28,838,100 $ 2,961,800 Traffic Control Devices Bodway Pkwy @ Camino Collegio $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Bodway Pkwy @ Valley House $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Bodway Pkwy @ Railroad $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Commerce Blvd@ Avram $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ Commerce Blvd @ Alison $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ - Dowdell Av @Wilfred $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Eleanor Av @ RPX $ 227,500 $ 227,500 $ - LabathAv @ Wilfred $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ Keiser $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ RPX $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ East Cotati $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ Railroad $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Redwood Dr @ Wilfred $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ - Seed Farm @ RPX $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Seed Farm @ Enterprise $ •162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Snyder Ln @ Eleanor $ 104,000 $ 104,000 $ - Snyder Ln @ Keiser $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ Snyder Ln @ RPX $ 195,000 $ 195,000 $ Snyder Ln 0 Southwest Blvd $ 104,000 $ 104,000 $ - Stony Point Rd @ Wilfred $ 286,000 $ 286,000 $ Subtotal $ 3,256,500 $ 3,256,500 $ State Farm Drive Overpass $ 9,818,000 1 Subtotal for Roadways $ 44,874,400 $ 32,094,600 $2,961,80 May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Executive Summary Table ES -1 (b) Other Public Facilities in the Public Facilities Finance Plan Page ES - 5 Final Improvement Description Total Cost New Development Share Existing Development Share Public Safety New West Side Safety Station $ 5,140,000 $1,843,068 $3,296,93 Station Four Expansion $ 728,000 $728,000 $0 Training Facilities $ 2,197,500 $546,384 $1,651,11 Public Facilities. ` City Hall $ 7,458,000 $1,854,340 $5,603,66 Corporation Yard Expansion $ 853,450 $853,450 $0 Parks & Recreation Community Fields $ 21,759,000 $5,410,100 $16,348,900 Senior Center Expansion $ 100,100 $24,895 $75,20 Community Center Campus Improvements $ 3,406,000 $846,864 $2,559,136 Utilities Recycled Water Main $ 764,400 $764,400 $0 Water Transmission Line $ 764,400 $764,400 $0 Sewer Main $ 6,558,600 $6,558,600 $0 Sewer Trunk $ 12,000,000 $2,983,643 $9,016,35 Utility System Models & Studies Water System Master Plan $ 200,000 $49,731 $150,26 Sewer System Master Plan $ 200,000 $49,731 $150,26 Storm Drainage Master Plan $ $0 $ Regional Transportation Improvements Petaluma Hili Road at Penn rove $ 15,000,000 East Cotati Ave $ 1,100,000 Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange $ 40,000,000 $33,350,139 $6,649,861 Subtotals for Other Public Facilities Subtotal for Roadways Total Facility Costs $ 118,229,450 $ 44,874,400 $ 163,103,850 $56,627,745 $32,094,600 $ 88,722,345 $45,501,70 $2,961,80 $48,463,50 Note: Costs of Unfunded Facilities are not allocated to new or existing development ES.5 Summary of the Nexus Analysis for Capital Facilities Roadway Improvements: The roadway improvement component funds planned improvements to the citywide traffic circulation network. Improvements include roadway widenings, bridge widenings and traffic signal installation including intersection improvements. The Table ES -1 (a) lists the specific roadways, bridges and intersections that will be improved. The analysis spreads the costs over all land uses based on trip -generation potential. The mitigation fee burden is calculated on a citywide basis. Public Safety: The public safety component funds planned improvements including a new Westside Fire Station, expansion of Station 4 (Maurice) and a new public safety training center, currently proposed to be located with the new Westside Public Safety Station. The public safety component is calculated separately for the areas east and west of Highway 101 because different facilities are impacted by development. May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Page ES 6 Executive Summary Final The Westside Public Safety Station serves all land uses west of Highway 101, including existing uses that will benefit from faster response times. The mitigation fee component for the Westside Public Safety Station is calculated across all development, new and existing, west of Highway 101. The expansion of Station 4 is necessitated by new development on the east side of Highway 101. The mitigation fee component for Station 4 is calculated across all new development east of Highway 101. The new training facility is a centralized facility that will serve all development in the City. The mitigation fee training facility is calculated on a citywide basis and includes all land uses. Public Facilities: The public facilities component funds planned improvements for the new Civic Center and an expansion of the existing corporation yard. The new Civic Center is a centralized facility that will serve all new and existing development in the City. The mitigation fee burden is calculated on a citywide basis and includes all land uses. The expansion of the corporation yard is necessitated by new development. The mitigation fee burden is calculated across all new development in the City. Parks & Open Space: The parks and open space component funds the construction of Community Fields, an expansion of the Senior Center, and improvements to the campus of the Community Center located at Rohnert Park Expressway and Snyder Lane. These facilities will serve all new and existing development in the City. The mitigation fee burden is calculated on a citywide basis and includes all land uses. Utilities. The utilities component funds the extension of a water transmission main and a recycled water transmission main tb serve the eastside Specific Plan Areas and the expansion of the City's sewer main from Snyder Lane west under Highway 101. The extensions will serve new development east of Snyder Lane. The mitigation fee burden is calculated across all new development east of Snyder Lane. The utilities component also funds the upgrade of the City's trunk sewer from the Rohnert Park Pump Station to the Subregional Treatment Plant. The schedule for this upgrade is triggered by new development. However, the facility will be sized to serve both new and existing development. The mitigation fee burden is calculated across new and existing development. Utilities Modeling and System Planning & Studies: The utilities modeling and system planning studies component funds system models and studies for the City's water, sewer, and storm water systems. These are all centralized facilities and planning documents that will serve all development in the City, both new and existing. The mitigation fee burden is calculated on a citywide basis and includes all new and existing development. Regional Transportation: The regional transportation component funds planned improvements to Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange, Petaluma Hill Road in Sonoma County, and East Cotati Avenue in Cotati. Improvements to the Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange are necessary to create acceptable levels of service in the City's circulation system. The traffic model prepared for the General Plan and updated for this Finance Plan assumes that the Interchange improvements are in place. Improvements to the Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange have been programmed by Caltrans as part of its plan to improve the Highway 101 Corridor through Sonoma County. However, these planned improvements have been deferred because of constraints on the State's budgets. The facility is included in a proposed bond financing package. The mitigation fee burden has not yet been calculated. May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Page ES - 7 Executive Summary Final Improvements outside of the City's jurisdiction, namely improvements to Petaluma Hill Road in Sonoma County and East Cotati Avenue in Cotati, were identified in the City's General Plan and the City has committed to be a responsible participant in their planning and execution, to the extent that new development in the City. contributes to the impacted infrastructure. Currently the scope and cost of these regional facilities is undefined. They are being carried in the Finance Plan as unfunded facilities. Unfunded facilities likely meet the nexus test of the Mitigation Fee Act, however there is not enough information available to allow for appropriate cost allocation. The City may elect to increase fees in the future to cover unfunded facilities (provided it holds a properly noticed Public Hearing) or the City may dedicate surplus Mitigation Fee revenue towards unfunded facilities at a future date. ES.6 Summary of„,Base Mitigation Fee Burdens Table ES -2, on the following page presents the results of the Mitigation Fee calculation. The Mitigation Fees presented include a 3% administration allowance. These fee burdens represent the "fair share” cost of planning, design and construction for the facilities included in this Finance Plan, in current dollars. The Mitigation Fees do not take into account interest or the costs of financing. In some cases, the City may require certain backbone infrastructure be financed through bonds so that the infrastructure can be available to serve development immediately. In cases where infrastructure is financed through bonds, the City cannot collect mitigation fees from the same property owners for the same facilities. The Mitigation Fee Program is intended to function as a complete strategy for funding all capital improvements identified in this Finance Plan. While the Nexus Study has analyzed each proposed improvement individually, it is recommended that the City adopt a single Public Facilities Finance Plan Fee for the area east of Highway 101 and a single Public Facilities Finance Plan fee for the area west of Highway 101. This single fee concept allows the City of use available cash flow to fund needed facilities without undo restrictions. Column D in Table ES -2 lists the recommended Public Facilities Finance Plan Fees for the Eastside and the Westside of the City. The City is currently undertaking utility and modeling studies and additional capital improvements, triggered by new development, may be identified as the result of these efforts. The City may need to undertake a separate update of its water, sewer or storm drainage Mitigation Fees as a result of the ongoing studies. ES.7 Approval Process and Annual Updates The City Council approves all Mitigation Fees. The Council renders its decision on the proposed Mitigation Fees after calling a Public Hearing and considering testimony and evidence presented at a Public Hearing. The Act allows agencies to update their Mitigation Fees and requires annual public accountings for the fees and their use. These annual requirements include_ • Identification of each impact fee and fund with a description. • Identification of the amount of the fee. • Statement of the beginning and ending fund balance for each fee account. • Identification of capital facilities funded by the fees and the percentage funded by the fee (for example, a new City Hall might be funded 40% by impact fees and 60% by other City revenue sources). • Identification of the approximate time frame during which construction of improvements will occur. • Description of any inter -fund transfers or loans and when these loans will be repaid. May 25, 2004 l ��r��-`7��^:��n��rv,��,r.��r:i�n ��.S��aA.��"r��"4g��tm,.a;A��.��`-��M,9��^�'E'p��15•��°��7'�^'s�.at� Table ES -2 Summary of Proposed Mitigation Fees Regional Transportation Facilities not Included A B C D Population Based, Mitigation Fee Traffic Mitigation Fee Subtotal Mitigation Fees 3% Administrative Allowance Total Mitigation Fee Eastside Westside Eastside Westside Eastside Westside Eastside Westside Single Family Residential units $-5-,-5 5-2- $4,022 $2,451 $-8-,-00- 3- $6 472 $240 $194 $8,243 $6,666 Multi -Family Residential units $3,470 $2,51 $1,593 $5,063 $4,106 $152 $123 $5,215 $4,230 Senior Housing units $3470 $251 $980 $4,451 $3494 $134 $105 $4,584 $3,599 Assisted Living units $1 735 $1,257 $980 $2,715 $2 237 $81 $67 $2,797 $2,30 General Office thousandsquare feet $570 $413 $4,166 $4,736 $4,579 $142 $137 $4,878 $4,716 Hotel/Motel thousandsquare feet $1,829 $1,324 $4,411 $6,240 $5,7351 $187 $172 $6,427 $5,908 Strip Retail thousandsquare feet $3191 $2,311 $9,802 $12,993 $12,113 $390 $363 $13,383 $12,4771 Shopping Center/Retail thousandsquare feet $3,123 $2,262 $9,802 $12,925 $12,06 $388 $362 $13,313 $12,426 Light Industrial thousandsquare feet $-1,14-1- $826 $1,715 $2,856 $2,542 $86 $76 $2,942 $2,618 Heavy Industrial thousandsquare feet $1,141 $826 $1,715 $2,856 $2,54 $86 $76 $2,94 $2,618 Warehouse thousandsquare feet $1,141 $826 $1,19 $2,337 $2,02 $70 S61 $2,40 S2,083 Education students $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 Park/Recreation acres $0 $01$0 $0 $01$0 $0 $0 $0 Agricultural/Rural (acres) I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Table ES 2 for the Executive Summary.xls/ Fee Summary May 25, 2004 City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Executive Summary Page ES - 8 Final • Descriptions of any fee refunds that were made as a result of completion of identified capital improvements. All annual reporting is made at a public meeting. In a city with a large planned growth element, these annual findings are especially relevant. The fee calculations and revenue projections developed in this analysis are based on planning projections for new development and budgetary estimates for the capital improvements. As capital improvement budgets are updated through the design and construction process and as land use projections are updated as development proceeds, it is very important to update the Mitigation Fees to reflect current costs and growth patterns in order to assure that the Mitigation Fee Program is generating enough revenue to fund the planned capital facilities. ES.8 Summary of the Maintenance Annuity Fund Analysis This Finance Plan included review of each land uses' revenue generation potential and its service demands. This review concluded that overall, and at buildout, the City has a "balanced" land use pattern, meaning that overall revenue generation is generally equal to overall service costs. However the analysis also revealed that non-residential land uses generate sufficient revenue, through sales and property taxes, to cover the costs of maintenance and service. Residential land uses do not. Consistent with the General Plan and its Environmental Impact Report, it is recommended that the City establish a uniform Maintenance Annuity Fund ("MAF") deposit for all new residential units within the City to mitigate fiscal impacts. The MAF deposit will be invested by the City and investment proceeds would be used to fund maintenance and services. This Finance Plan recommends that the MAF deposit be sufficient to amortize the predicted fiscal impact in perpetuity, assuming an average annual interest rate of 6.11 % (the 15 -year average earned by the State's Local Agency Investment Fund). Because there is no general law procedure for establishing MAF contributions, the City will need to secure commitments for its proposed MAF through Development and Disposition Agreements. The recommended MAF deposit is $7,400 per dwelling unit. !� _ ES.9 Bond Financing Districts The City will approve development in accordance with its Growth Management Ordinance. This Ordinance has the effect of limiting the number of residential building permits that the City can issue, in order to maintain an average annual growth rate of approximately 1% per year. Hence, this Ordinance will limit the amount of Mitigation Fee revenue that the City can collect in a single year, because Mitigation Fees are collected at the time a building permit is issued by the City. Some of the capital improvements included in the Mitigation Fee Program need to be constructed prior to the occupancy of newly developed land in the Specific Plan Areas. The Finance Plan includes provisions to offset all or a portion of the proposed Mitigation Fees with assessment or special tax liens in order to facilitate orderly construction of public facilities. Developers within the Specific Plan Areas may reduce or completely pay-off their calculated Mitigation Fee .burden by participating in a bond -financing program. Development that occurs after the bond financing takes place would be required to pay Mitigation Fees in order to support their "fair share" of capital improvements. Table ES -3 outlines the Finance Plan facilities that could be needed early in the General Plan Implementation and are therefore included in a possible bond financing program. The costs shown do not include the costs of financing. May 25, 2004 W NO i i N City of Rohnert Park Public Facilities Finance Plan Page ES - 9 Executive Summary Final Table ES -3 also includes the Wilfred Avenue Golf Course Drive Interchange, assuming its construction will be funded through a bond sale. Table ES -3 assumes participation from all new development and from existing development located along Wilfred Avenue and Golf Course Drive, adjacent to the proposed improvement. This assumption provides a method to calculate a preliminary cost -share. This cost -share will need to be refined as the proposed bond financing district is developed. Table ES -3 Potential Bond Financed Facilities Improvement Description Total Cost New Development Share Existing Development Share Roadway Improvements& Bridges A4 No. Name 3 Dowdell Avenue Widening Wilfred to 750' south $ 695,300 $ 695,300 $ 4 Dowdell Avenue extension 50' south of Wilfed to Business Park $ 924,100 $ 924,100 $ Bridge.Bridge@ Business Park Drive $ 498,000 $ 498,000 $ 5 East Cotati Avenue (Bodway to Petaluma Hill Road $ 4,014,500 $ 3,460,800 $ 553,700 7 Keiser Avenue (Snyder to Petaluma Hill Road $ 3,258,400 $ 3,072,000 $, 186,400 8 Rohnert Park Expressway (Snyder to Petaluma Hill Road) $ 3,518,900 $ 3,432,400 $ 86,500 10 Snyder Lane G Section to Middle School $ 2,347,400 $ 2,265,600 $ 81,800 Bridge @•Copeland Creek $ 162,000 $ 162,000 Bride @ Crane Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 $ - 11 Snyder Lane (Middle School to Med Center Drive) $ 1,945,400 $ 1,924,900 $ 20,500 Bridge @ Five Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 12 Snyder Lane Med Center Drive to Southwest Blvd.) $ 5,056,800 $ 5,006,400 $ 50,400 Bridge @ Hinebaugh Creek $ 201,000 $ 201,000 $ - 13 Wilfred Avenue (1999 City Limits to Urban Growth Bound ) $ 3,310,000 $ 3,233,900 $ 76,100 Traffic Control Devices Bodway Pkwy @ Camino Collegio $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Bodway Pkwy @ Valley House $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ Dowdell Av @Wilfred $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ Eleanor Av @ RPX $ 227,500 $ 227,500 $ - Labath Av @ Wilfred $ 1.62,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ Keiser $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ RPX $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Petaluma Hill Rd @ East Cotati $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ - Redwood Dr @ Wilfred $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ - Snyder Ln @ Eleanor $ 104,000 $ 104,000 $ - Snyder Ln @ Keiser $ 162,500 $ 162,500 $ Snyder Ln @ RPX $ 195,000 $ 195,000 $ Snyder Ln Q Southwest Blvd $ 104,000 $ 104,000 $ - Public Safety New West Side Safety Station $ 5,140,000 $1,843,068 $3,296,93 Utilities Recycled Water Main $ 764,400 $764,400 Water Transmission Line $ 764,400 $764,400 $0 Sewer Main $ 6,558,600 $6,558,600 $0 Sewer Trunk $ 12,000,000 $2,983,643 $9,016,357 Subtotal without Regional Trans oration $ 53,621,700 $ 40,253,011 $13,368,689 Regional Transportation Improvements Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive Interchange 1 $ 40,000,000 $33,350,139 $6,649,861 Totals for Bond Financing Program $ 93,621,700 $ 73,603,150 $20,018,55 (1) Cost Share is currently an estimate assuming participation by all new development and all existing development in Traffic Area Zones bordering the proposed Interchange Improvement. May 25, 2004 11