2018/06/14 Planning Commission Agenda Packet"'M -Ar P"
ICJ G]
CA LI lt]R�*�
City of Rohnert Park
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Thursday, June 14, 2018
6:00 P.M.
130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park
To-AnyTo-Any Member a the Audience Resirin ,�a�
to Address the Plariu • Cummis:siaoir:
For public comment on items listed or not listed on the agenda, or on agenda items if unable to speak at the scheduled time, you
may do so upon recognition from the Chairperson. PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL (Adams Blanquie Borba Giudice Haydon__)
DECLARATION OF ABSTENTION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF POSTING OF AGENDA — Agenda has been posted in
three public places: Community Center, Public Safety Building and City Hall.
PUBLIC COMMENT - Persons who wish to speak to the Commission regarding an
item that is not on the agenda may do so at this time.
CONSENT CALENDAR - ADOPTION OF MINUTES
7.1 Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March 22,
2018
AGENDA ITEMS
8.1 PUBLIC HEARING — TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND
DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN - File No. PLDP17-0004 — Signature Homes—
Consideration of Resolution No. 2018-33 recommending to the City Council the
approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Area Plan to allow the
subdivision and development of property (commonly known as the Gee Property)
located south of Keiser Avenue and within the University District Specific Plan
Area (APN 045-253-009 thru -012)
CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
of Rohnert Park, as the lead agency, has conducted an environmental review of
the University District Specific Plan Area, which includes the project site. The
City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to address the potentially
significant adverse environmental impacts that may be associated with the
planning, construction, or operation of the Project and to identify appropriate
and feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to
significantly reduce or avoid the impacts ideratffiFed in the EIR. The City
certified the Final EIR on May 23, 2006 and approved an Addendum to the
Final EIR on April 8, 2014.
An Environmental Consistency Analysis was prepared for this project, which
concluded that the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Area
Plan is consistent with the analysis in the EIR and Addendum and would not
result in additional environmental effects. Therefore, no additional
environmental review is necessary.
9. ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
10. ITEMS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE STAFF
11. ADJOURNMENT
Appeals of any decisions made tonight must be received by the Planning Division within 10
days and no later than S: 00 p.m. on June 25, 2018
NOTE: If you challenge the nature of the proposed action in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at public hearing(s) described in this
Agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to the
public hearing(s).
Disabled Accommodation: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if
you need special assistance to participate in this meeting please call (707) 588-2236. Notification
72 hours in advance of the meeting will enable the city to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 3 5.102.3 5.104 AD Title III)
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Sonia Espino, Community Development Assistant for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that
the foregoing notice and agenda for the June 14, 2018, Planning Commission Meeting of the
City of Rohnert Park was posted and available for review on June 8, 2018, at Rohnert Park City
Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. Theagenda is available on the Cit
of Rohnert Park's web site at www.rpci!y.org.
Signed this 8th day of June, 2018 at Rohnert Park, California.
�L�14ML Nl �'n/P4
.y s,
C�Al NPCP N.:a tin
City of Rohnert Park
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: June 14, 2018
Agenda Item No: 8.1
Subject: Consideration of the Bristol Tentative Subdivision Map and Development
Area Plan for the Bristol (Gee) Property (PLDP 17-0004) located within
the University District Specific Plan Area (APN 045-253-009 thru -012).
Location: Approximately 6.2 acre lot located south of Keiser Avenue and north of
Lawrence Jones Middle School and within the University District Specific
Plan Area
Applicant: Signature Homes
SUBJECT
Resolution No. 2018-33 recommending City Council approval of the Bristol Tentative Subdivision
Map and Development Area Plan for a 42 -unit development on a 6.2 -acre property located within
the University District Specific Plan Area (APN 045-253-009 thru -012).
BACKGROUND
In 2006, the University District Specific Plan (UDSP) was approved and associated General Plan
amendments were adopted and implemented to allow development of 1,610 residential units. The
UDSP included approximately 300 acres of lands owned by five property owners (University
District LLC, Vast Oak Properties, Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District, Gee, and Linden)
in the City of Rohnert Park. A total of 42 units were allocated to the Bristol property (previously
the Gee Property). An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and adopted by the City
in conjunction with this 2006 approval of the Specific Plan.
In April 2014, the City Council approved revisions to the adopted Specific Plan, which included
changes to the Development Standards and Design Guidelines and allowed an increase in the
number of residential units and reduction in the amount of commercial area. The number of units
allocated to the 6.2 -acre Bristol (Gee) property did not change. As part of the approval process,
the City Council also approved an Addendum to the UDSP EIR.
Parks and Recreation Commission
On December 13, 2017, the Parks and Recreation Commission considered a proposal by the
applicant to pay a park in -lieu fee as a way of complying with the parkland dedication requirement
for the site.
PROPOSED PROJECT AND ENTITLEMENTS
On August 14, 2017, Stephen Miller, on behalf of Signature Homes submitted an application for
a Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Area Plan to develop the 6.2 -acre Bristol (Gee)
Property with 42 units plus create a 9,814 square foot water quality detention basin parcel. The
application includes the following:
Tentative Subdivision Map
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Subdivision Map demonstrating the intended subdivision
of an existing four -lot 6.2 acre property into 42 single family lots plus a 9,814 square foot water
quality basin parcel. Access to the development will be from a new public roadway connection at
Keiser Avenue. The project includes the following components:
New On-site Roadway - The project will be required to complete installation of the onsite roadway
that complies with the University District Specific Plan. This includes a 52 -foot wide right-of-
way with each side of the street incorporating a 6 -foot wide parking aisle, a 5 -foot wide landscape
strip and a 5 -foot wide detached sidewalk.
Private Lane Connections - There are three (north/south) private lane connections that will extend
from the new on-site roadway; each will provide access to 6 residential units. These private lanes
will be 20 feet wide and will not connect to Keiser Avenue. However, one of the lanes will include
an approximately 5 -foot wide concrete pedestrian connection onto the future Keiser Avenue
sidewalk system.
Keiser Avenue Widening - The UDSP identifies Keiser Avenue as having strong east -west bicycle
and pedestrian connections. Total right-of-way width is 56 feet, which includes 32 feet curb to
curb (including a 5 -foot bicycle lane on each side of the roadway), plus a 5 -foot parkway strip and
a 6 -foot sidewalk on each side. Keiser Avenue has been slated for improvement with the above
configuration as part of the City's Five-year Capital Improvement Project budget and will likely
be constructed ahead of the proposed development. In the event the expected Keiser roadway
improvements lag behind construction of the improvements on the project site, the applicant will
be responsible for installation of the segment of Keiser Avenue from Snyder Lane to the
intersection of Kerry Road. The applicant would be eligible for Public Facilities Fee Program
(PFFP) fee credits for any improvements included in the PFFP.
Water basin maintenance - 9,814 square foot park -like water quality detention basin is proposed
on the northwest corner of the site. All of the storm water runoff from the project will be directed
to this water basin. The basin will utilize a combination of engineered fill and plants to filter the
storm water and promote percolation of water runoff.
Parkland Dedication - California Government Code Section 66477, Subdivision Map Act, referred
to as the Quimby Act, permits local jurisdictions to require the dedication of land and/or the
payment of in -lieu fees solely for park and recreation purposes. The required dedication and/or fee
are based upon the residential density, parkland cost, and other factors. Land dedication and fees
collected pursuant to the Quimby Act may be used for acquisition, improvement, and expansion
of park, playground, and recreational facilities or the development of public school grounds. The
City of Rohnert Park requires 5.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons.
The UDSP identifies an estimated population rate for the entire UDSP area. The UDSP estimated
a population of 3.2 persons per household and a total required park area of .67 acres for the Bristol
(Gee) property (page 38 of the UDSP). To satisfy the project's parkland dedication requirement,
the applicant is proposing to pay an in -lieu fee. Pursuant to Section 16.14.020, for projects
proposing the payment of an In -lieu fee (in -lieu of dedication), the amount of the In -lieu fee shall
be equal to the fair market value of the land prescribed for dedication plus the cost of
improvements. The total in -lieu fee obligation for the project was determined to be $248,816.
The applicant's proposal was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) on
December 13, 2017, and the PRC recommended approval of the proposed method to comply with
the parkland dedication requirement. However, the PRC directed staff to continue to work with
the applicant to identify a direct access point from the subdivision to the neighboring school site.
Working with staff and the school district, the applicant is proposing an access point that runs
north to south along the western property line (Parcel B in Figure 2).
Affordable Housing Obligation - The project consists of a subdivision and development proposal
for 42 market rate units. In accordance with the University District Specific Plan (page 46) the
project is obligated to 6.3 affordable housing units. The applicant proposes to meet this obligation
through payment of affordable housing in -lieu fees.
Pursuant to Section 17.07.020.N - Inclusionary Housing a developer of a residential development
project may propose to meet the inclusionary housing requirements by an alternative equivalent
action, subject to the review and approval by the city council. While the City's Ordinance provides
for the concept of in -lieu payments, the City has not formally established an in -lieu fee for
residential projects. The ordinance does state that the amounts and calculation of the housing in -
lieu fee shall be established by resolution of the city council. The City is currently in the process
of evaluating an appropriate in lieu fee to be used for residential development projects. A proposal
is expected to be presented to the City Council for consideration in 2018. As such, a condition of
project approval will require the applicant to pay the appropriate affordable housing in -lieu fee as
adopted by the City Council at the time of Building Permit Issuance.
Offsite Improvements - Improvements in Keiser Avenue are generally non-existent, including
surface improvements (pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, and landscaping), wet
utilities (potable water, sanitary sewer, recycled water, and storm drains), and dry utilities (electric,
gas, phone, and cable). In addition, there is an existing overhead pole line along the south side of
the street that is in conflict with surface improvements. Full improvement of the Keiser Avenue
project frontage will be required. Improvements will include sidewalk, street lighting, street trees
and landscaping, and any other items not included in the City's CIP project.
Extension of a sanitary sewer to the site will be required. The sanitary sewer extension will extend
in Snyder Lane from the existing College Trunk Sewer near Hinebaugh Creek north to Keiser
Avenue, then east in Snyder Lane to the project. The City is including the sanitary sewer line in
the design of its' Keiser Avenue CIP project, but has not funded the sanitary sewer work. The
Developer will need to fund the full cost of the sanitary sewer construction, and may enter into a
reimbursement agreement with the City for reimbursement from other properties tying into the
sewer main when those properties develop.
Figure 1: Project Location
Pro Site,'
Site
9 PfioPOSE 6ELOPME'T' ieoo
I :
------------
d HiNEBAUGHGREEK ?i
e
I
y
y ,
p♦ /.iii!/AI --fir, r_ :�--„ _. ::.., .:. .-.. �� ..... .....
Development Area Plan
The project includes a proposed Development Area Plan for development of the project site with
42 units and associated landscape, fencing and access improvements. The project proposes three
(3) floor plans with floor areas as follows:
Table 1: Summary of Floor Plan
OAK TREES TO STAY WETLANDS
WITHIN PARK
AFFORDABLE -1-
2 �1
First Floor Area
Second Floor Area
Total square footage
Floor Plan One 1,527 square feet
729 square feet
2,256 square feet
Floor Plan Two 1,173 square feet
1,316 square feet
2,489 square feet
Floor Plan Three 1,364 square feet
1,302 square feet
2,666 square feet
The plan types will be distributed throughout the development to avoid monotony in the
architectural designs. The lot plotting is demonstrated in Figure 1.
Figure 2: Site Plan and Unit Plotting
Architecture -Each floor plan provides three architectural design options as follows:
• Craftsman - This style includes a blending of stucco, horizontal lap siding and cultured stone
veneer posts. Posts are smooth tapers as is typical of the craftsman style. Composition roof
with gently sloped gable ends is used for this style;
• Modern Farmhouse - This style includes a blending of stucco with board and batten siding and
wooden posts. Composition roof with gable ends is used for this style, however, metal roof
material is used at the entry and porch.
• Modern Prairie - This style is a more modern design blending stucco with cultured stone
veneer. Horizontal siding is incorporated as a vertical element on all three of the plan options.
The stone veneer is incorporated as a more rigid design element differing from craftsman style.
Composition hip roof is used for this style.
• Parking - 84 parking spaces are provided within the two -car garages for the units. An
additional 84 guest parking spaces are accommodated within the driveways and approximately
45 spaces are possible within the new roadway.
• Landscape Plan - The applicant proposes a combination of Chinese Pistache trees, and low
water use ground cover within the landscape strips along the new street. The front yards of the
individual lots will be landscaped with a combination of low water use trees, shrubs and
groundcover.
• Walls and Fences - The applicant proposes to use a 6 -foot high vertical slat good neighbor
fence (either redwood or cedar) within the interior of the development. Along Keiser Avenue
the applicant proposes the use of a 6 -foot high, acoustic grade good neighbor fence. Fencing
around the detention basin will consist of a 3.25 -foot high precast concrete rail fence.
■ Garbage can storage - The applicant proposes to utilize the side yard for storage of garbage
cans. Sheets C.7.1 and C.7.2 demonstrate how this can be accomplished. These sheets also
demonstrate location of on -street placement that would occur on garbage pick-up days.
• Mailbox - The applicant proposes to install three 16 -door gang mailbox structures. There is no
overhead structure proposed for these units. However, in other locations within the City, the
applicants have been required to install an overhead weather protection structure. As such, a
condition of approval requires the applicant to provide a design option during the building
permit submittal for review by the Planning Manager.
Figure 3: Plan One Architecture
CRAFTSMAN
1. Composilion Roof
2 Slucco
* Corbels al Gable -End
4,Foam Trim
5, Board & Borten Gable -B
6, Horizordal Lap Siding
7. Cultured Slone Veneer
MODERN FARMHC
1, Composilion Rc
2. S tucco
3. Gable -End Kick -
4. Foam Trim
5. Board & Ba4en
6. Metal Roof
7. Wooden Posls
elevaflartA - CRAFTSMAN `� '
MODERN PRAIRIE
1. Composilion Roof
2. Sl ucco
3. Foam Trim
4. Harizonlal Lap Siding
5. Cullured Stone Veneer
elevationB - MODERN FARMHOUSE $CAM 11`•1"
elevallonC -MODERN PRAIRIE
Figure 4: Plan Two Architecture
CRAFTSMAN
1 Composition Roof
2, Stucco
3 Corbels at Gable -End
4. Foam Trim
5. Board & Batten Gable -End Siding
6. Horizontal Lap Siding
7. Cultured Stone Veneer
MODERN FARMHOUSE
1. Composition Roof
2. Stucco
3, Gable -End Kickers
4. Foam Trim
S. Board & Ballen Siding
6,Me1a1 Roof
7. Wooden Posts
&. Decoralive Shutters
MODERN PRAIRIE
1. Conlpositlon Roof
2 Stucco
3.. Foam Trim
4. Horizonlal Lap Siding
5. Cultured Stone Vene
elevationA - CRAFTSMAN
elevationB - MODERN FARMHOUSE T
elevationC - MODERN PRAIRIESn"`E "° -' P
Figure 5: Plan Three Architecture
CRAFTSMAN!
1. Composition Roof
2. Stucco
3. Corbels at Gable -End
4. Foam Trim
5, Horizontal Lap Siding
6. Cultured Slone Veneer
MODERN FARMHOUSE
I. Composition Roof
2, Stucco
3. Gable -End Kickers
4. Foam Trim
5. Board & Batten Siding
6.. Metal Roof
7. Wooden Posh
8. Decoralive Shu Rers
MODERN PRAIRIE
1. CoMp7I ion Roof
2. Stucco
3, Foam Trim
4. He i -M.1 LapSiding
5, Cullured Stone Vener
6, Metal Posls
4
elevationB - MODERN FARMHOUSE "`' a
elevationC - MODERN PRAIRIE N
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Rohnert Park, as the
lead agency, has conducted an environmental review of the University District Specific Plan Area,
which includes the project site. The City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to
address the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that may be associated with the
planning, construction, or operation of the Project and to identify appropriate and feasible
mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to significantly reduce or avoid the
impacts identified in the EIR. The City certified the Final EIR on May 23, 2006 and approved an
Addendum to the Final EIR on April 8, 2014.
An Environmental Consistency Analysis was prepared for this project, which concluded that the
proposed Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Area Plan is consistent with the analysis
in the EIR and Addendum and would not result in additional environmental effects. Therefore, no
additional environmental review is necessary.
PROJECT ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting Planning Commission consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map
and Development Area Plan for the Bristol (Gee) property located with the University District
Specific Plan boundaries.
The submittal documents as described above and included as Attachment A provide details on the
project including residential floor plans and elevations by housing type, pedestrian walkways,
infrastructure summaries, a portion of the streetscape details. The proposed development is
consistent with the specific plan because it conforms to the requirements in the specific plan related
to density, housing type, housing location, public improvements, and related amenities. The
Development Area Plan as conditioned is designed to have adequate infrastructure, integrated with
existing City roadways, streets, bicycle paths, and walkways. All streets and thoroughfares will
meet the standards of the City. All the necessary findings for approval of both the Tentative
Subdivision Map and the Development Area Plan can be made and are included in the Planning
Commission Resolution.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND INFORMATION
A public hearing notice denoting the time, date, and location of this hearing was published in the
Community Voice on March 30, 2018. Property owners within 300 feet of the Project site and
interested parties requesting notification were also mailed notices, and the notice was posted
pursuant to State law.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending City Council
approval of the Bristol Tentative Subdivision and Development Area Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 2018-33
Exhibits
A — Tentative Subdivision Map & Development Area Plan
B — Conditions of Approval
2. Environmental Consistency Analysis
APPROVALS:
Brett Bollinger, Senior Planner Date
Manager
Da e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2018-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND
DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE GEE PROPERTY)
LOCATED SOUTH OF KEISER AVENUE AND WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY
DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN AREA,
(APN 045-253-009 thru -012)
WHEREAS, the applicant, Stephen Miller, on behalf of Signature Homes, filed Planning
Applications proposing a Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Area Plan to allow the
subdivision and development of property (commonly known as the Gee property) located south of
Keiser Avenue and within the University District Specific Plan Area —APN 045-253-009 thru -
012 (the "Project"), in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("RPMC"); and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the University District Specific
Plan Project (State Clearinghouse number 2003112011) and Addendum to the EIR have been
prepared and approved which shows potential impacts related to the development of the site with
the proposed uses; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Consistency Analysis prepared
for this Project, which concluded that the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map and Development
Area Plan is consistent with the analysis in the EIR and Addendum, and has otherwise carried out
all requirements for the Project pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the RPMC, public hearing notices were
mailed to all property owners within an area exceeding a three hundred foot radius of the subject
property and a public hearing was published for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first public
hearing in the Community Voice; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing at which
time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the proposal;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information
contained in Planning Application No. PLDP17-0004 for the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map
and Development Area Plan for the property; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Rohnert Park, based on the record of the proceedings, including the oral and written staff report
and attachments and all oral and written testimony, makes the following findings, determinations
and recommendations with respect to the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map and Development
Area Plan for the property:
Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct and incorporated herein.
Section 2. Findings _Regarding Tentative Subdivision Map. The Planning
Commission hereby makes the following findings concerning the Tentative Subdivision Map
pursuant to RPMC Section 16.10.090(E):
1. The proposed map, and its design and improvements, are consistent with the
general plan and any applicable specific plan, any policy or guideline
implementing the general plan (including the city's design guidelines), or other
applicable provisions of this code.
Criteria Satisfied. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the
General Plan designations for the area, as well as the specific plan that applies to
the property. The proposed Tentative Map will implement the General Plan in that
it would increase the City's existing housing stock. The Tentative Map will comply
with the goals and policies of the City's Housing Element by complying with the
City's inclusionary housing ordinance through payment of in -lieu fees.
The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the revised University District
Specific Plan as it proposes to subdivide the property according to its requirements
related to number of residential units, density, housing type, housing location,
public improvements, open space and related amenities. The Tentative Map
depicts the specific residential lots consistent with the Specific Plan.
The proposed Tentative Map has been designed to meet City standards which
provide satisfactory pedestrian and vehicular circulation, including emergency
vehicle access and on site improvements, such as streets, utilities, and drainage
facilities have been designed and are conditioned to be constructed in conformance
with City standards.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development.
Criteria Satisfied. The Tentative Map reflects the specific plan for this site, which
is physically suitable for the proposed development. No major geologic hazards
have been reported on the site or other limited conditions that would render it
unsuitable for residential development.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
Criteria Satisfied. The site is of sufficient size and shape and appropriately shown
in the Specific Plan to allow the proposed density of development. The subdivision
has been designed to accommodate the development of 42 residential units, taking
into consideration the shape and topography of the site. This development is
consistent with the density ranges provided for in the Specific Plan.
4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat, absent a statement of overriding conditions.
Criteria Satisfied. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the University
District Specific Plan Project (State Clearinghouse number 2003112011) and
Addendum to this EIR has been prepared and approved which shows potential
impacts related to the development of the site with the proposed uses. No
significant unavoidable impacts related to existing habitats were identified. The
Final EIR for this Project includes adoption of associated CEQA Findings,
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program. The contents of the Final EIR are incorporated herein by this
reference. A consistency analysis has been prepared to in connection with the
proposed project which demonstrates the project would not result in new impacts.
5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not cause serious
public health problems.
Criteria Satisfied. The design of the project is not expected to have negative
impacts on the health or wellbeing of project residents or occupants of the
surrounding land uses. The design of the Tentative Map is in conformance with the
City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance. The
construction of all units on the site has been conditioned to comply with all
applicable City ordinances, codes, and standards including, but not limited to, the
California Uniform Building Code, the City's Ordinances relating to Stormwater
runoff management and controls. In addition, the design and construction of all
improvements for the subdivision has been conditioned to be in conformance with
adopted City street and public works standards. The City's ordinances, codes, and
standards have been created based on currently accepted standards and practices
for the preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. Finally, the proposed
street system throughout the subdivision will improve emergency vehicular access
and in the immediate neighborhood.
6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
with the proposed subdivision, absent alternative, equivalent easements.
Criteria Satisfied. The project will respect all existing easements, and any new
easements required by the project have been made conditions of the map approval.
7. Any proposed phases and their proposed sequence of construction are identified on
the submitted map.
Criteria Satisfied. The project is a 42 -unit development proposal that will be
constructed in a single phase.
Section 3. Findings Regarding Development Area Plan. The Planning Commission
hereby makes the following findings concerning the Development Area Plan findings in
accordance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 17.06.400:
1. The proposed development conforms to the applicable specific plan.
Criteria Satisfied. The Bristol Development Area Plan (DAP) submittal is
consistent with the Specific Plan and provides additional details on the project
including residential floor plans and elevations by housing type, and landscaping
details and specifications. The proposed DAP is consistent with the Specific Plan
because it conform to the requirements in the Specific Plan related to density,
housing type, housing location, public improvements, landscaping, and related
amenities. The DAP is designed to have adequate infrastructure and be integrated
with existing City roadways, streets, bicycle paths, and walkways. All streets and
thoroughfares will meet the standards of the City as is required by the Specific Plan.
The recommended conditions of approval for the DAP ensure that implementation
of the Development Area Plan will remain consistent with the Specific Plan,
Tentative Map, and mitigation measures.
2. Public infrastructure and services can be provided concurrently with the
development.
Criteria Satisfied. The developer will be required to participate in the Public
Facilities Financing Plan, which will provide for necessary off-site public facilities,
and shall be responsible for on-site facilities to meet the project's needs. The
Development Agreement for the project sets forth the timing of the necessary
facilities as they relate to the physical development of the site.
Section 4. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of Application No. PLDP17-0004 for a Tentative Map and Development Area Plan,
Exhibit A, to allow the subdivision and development of property (commonly known as the Gee
property) located south of Keiser Avenue and within the University District Specific Plan Area —
APN 045-253-009 thru -012, subject to the recommended conditions of approval in Exhibit B:
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 14th day of June, 2018 by the City of
Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote:
Attest:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
ADAMS BLANQUIE BORBA _ GIUDICE HAYDON
Chairperson, City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission
Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
BRISTOL DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
Available for viewing and printing:
Development Services Department
City Hall
2"d floor
130 Avram Avenue
Rohnert Park, CA
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE MAP AND DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN
The conditions below shall apply to the Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) and Development Area Plan
(DAP) for the Bristol project within the University District Specific plan. The Bristol project shall
be developed in accordance with the General Plan (GP), University District Specific Plan (UDSP),
Final Development Plan, Mitigation Measures identified in the University District Specific Plan
Amended Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), and the Design and Construction Standards.
The Conditions of Approval as stated herein are the obligation of the applicant/developer and place
no obligation either express or implied on the City. These Conditions of Approval run with this
Vesting Tentative Map and Development Area Plan as approved regardless of ownership at time of
recording.
General On -Going Conditions
1) The applicant shall comply with all documents approved by the City Council and adhere to
all exhibits presented by the applicant at the Planning Commission and\or City Council
meeting for approval of the University District Specific Plan- Gee Property Vesting
Tentative Map unless subsequently revised by the City.
2) The applicant shall comply with the UDSP FEIR. In addition, the applicant shall pay the cost
to monitor the MMs identified in the FEIR for the UDSP (SCH # 2003122014) as they relate
to the Gee property, kept on file in the Development Services Department. The requirements
contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) shall be incorporated into these
conditions and shall be constructed in accordance with the MMP.
3) The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents,
elected and appointed officials, and employees, from any and all liability or claims that may
be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this Tentative Map and
Development Area Plan and associated entitlements pertaining to the Southeast Specific Plan
save and except that caused by the City's active negligence or willful misconduct.
4) By accepting the benefits conferred under this approval, the applicant acknowledges all the
conditions imposed and accepts this approval subject to those conditions with full awareness
of the provisions of the Final Development Plan (FDP), as may be amended from time to
time, and the RPMC, as applicable.
5) The use of the property by the applicant/grantee for any activity authorized by this approval
shall constitute acceptance of all of the conditions and obligations imposed by the City on
this approval. The applicant/grantee by said acceptance waives any challenge as to the
validity of these conditions.
6) If the City is required to enforce any of the conditions of approval, the applicant shall pay all
City's costs. At the City's sole discretion, the City may require a cash deposit to cover
enforcement costs as a condition of the approval of any final map.
7) All improvements shall be in substantial conformance with the submitted Site Plan, Exterior
Elevations, and Landscape Plan, except as modified herein.
8) The design of all entrances to the site shall be subject to Department of Public Safety
approval.
9) Final design and placement of walls and fences shall be in accordance with the standards in
the approved Development Area Plan and shall be approved by planning staff.
10) All trees within five feet of the public right-of-way shall have root barriers that are approved
by the Development Service Director.
11) A permanent automatic sprinkler shall be installed to maintain all landscape materials and
areas.
12) The applicant's engineer shall coordinate with the City Engineer to ensure that recycled
water is used for irrigation of the project's landscaping as feasible.
13) All exterior lighting shall be designed so as to prevent any spillover lighting onto adjacent
properties and rights-of-way. Lighting elements will be required to be recessed within their
fixtures to prevent glare. New lighting levels provided shall be compatible with general
illumination levels in existing areas to avoid a noticeable contrast in light emissions,
consistent with the need to provide for safety and security. Exterior project lighting shall be
reviewed and approved by Development Services Director.
14) The design of any entry monument signage shall be submitted to the Planning Division for
review and approval prior to installation.
15) All double-check valves provided for domestic water and fire sprinkler systems shall be
concealed from public view. Plans shall be submitted to the Development Services
Department and City Engineer for review and approval.
16) Building code provisions shall apply to the construction, alteration, moving, demolition,
repair, maintenance and use of any building or structure within the jurisdiction of the City,
except work located primarily in a public way, public utility towers and poles, mechanical
equipment not specifically regulated by building code provisions, and hydraulic flood control
structures. All projects shall comply with the most current code recognized by the City at
the time of their building permit application. All State and local ordinances shall be
applicable to current projects. (Building Services)
17) Geotechnical investigation reports shall be submitted for all building permit projects unless
waived by the Building Official. When required by the Building Official, the potential for
soil liquefaction and soil strength loss during earthquakes shall be evaluated during geo-
technical investigations. Compaction reports are required for each building pad site and all
compaction reports shall be submitted prior to a foundation inspection and in compliance
with the soils and geo-technical recommendations. (Building Services)
18) A completed and approved wet fire hydrants system, or other system approved by the
Building Official and Department of public Safety (DPS), and all weather roads shall be in
place prior to any flammable or combustible material (such as wood) being brought onto the
site. The applicant may tie to the water system for fire flow only. Fire access road shall
meet the DPS Fire Access Road Standard. These fire access roads shall continue to be
accessible until acceptance of the public streets by the City. (Building Services)
19) Pursuant to California State Assembly Bill 3158, the applicant shall pay the filing fee to the
Department of Fish and Game. The fee shall be submitted to the Planning Division upon
filing of any required Notice of Determination, along with any filing fee required by the
County Clerk/Recorder. The applicant should be aware that Section 21089(b) of the Public
Resources Code provides that any project approved under CEQA is not operative, vested or
final until the required fee is paid. Proof of fee payment may be required prior to the
issuance of building permits or filing of a final map. (Building Services)
20) All public utilities easements (PUE) and public access easements shall be open and
accessible at all times. (Building Services)
21) All septic tanks, leach fields and related items in the final map area shall be abandoned and
destroyed in a manner approved by the Department of Environmental Health Services.
Water wells that the applicant chooses to abandon shall be destroyed in a manner approved
by the Department of Environmental Health Services. (Building Services)
22) The applicant shall submit plans and obtain separate building permits for retaining walls over
four (4) feet in height and for all other walls, fences and signs over six (6) feet in height.
(Building Services)
23) The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit for any structure to be demolished. All
underground structures shall be abated, back-filled, inspected and approved by Sonoma
County Environmental Health Services or the Building Official as applicable. (Building
Services)
24) For any project requiring an on-site inspector to monitor grading, construction and/or
development, the applicant shall deposit funds with the City to cover the full cost of an
inspector prior to any land disturbance. The City Engineer, as appropriate, shall approve the
amount and hire the inspector. (Building Services)
25) The developer shall implement a dust control program as part of the measures required by
the FEIR for air quality control and the requirements of PM 10 and the Best Available
Control Measures (BALM). The program shall ensure that, at the City Engineer's discretion,
a water vehicle for dust control operations is kept readily available at all times during
construction. The developer shall provide the City Engineer and Building Official with the
name and telephone number of the person directly responsible for dust control and operation
of the water vehicle. (Building Services)
26) A Tree Preservation and Removal Plan including a separate tree removal and sensitive area
plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for review and approval in
accordance with City ordinance. The plan shall show all sensitive areas and stands of trees
that are to be protected during grading operations and include, in detail, the method proposed
to protect these areas. (Planning Services)
27) The applicant shall pay all application fees, plan check and inspection fees, recordation fees,
park in -lieu fees, encroachment permit fees, segregation of assessment fees and other
applicable miscellaneous fees in effect at the time the fee is paid as required in the Fee
Schedule or RPMC. The applicant shall receive credit against, or reimbursement of, its park
in -lieu fee for any dedication, or irrevocable offer of dedication, of park property. (Planning
Services)
28) All improvements shall comply with all applicable sections of the City of Rohnert Park
Municipal Code and any other applicable relevant plans of affected agencies, unless
superseded by the Specific Plan for this property. (Planning Services)
29) The improvement plans shall show water services to each building. All water meters shall
be within the public right-of-way unless the Public Works Director specifically approves
exceptions. The City shall not maintain water and sewer system lines beyond existing main
line stub outs or on private property, unless otherwise agreed to by the City. Access
easements shall be given to the City and recorded concurrently with the final map for any
exceptions approved by the City Engineer that require access to private property. (Planning
Services)
30) If applicable, easements of record not shown on the tentative map shall be relinquished or
relocated. Lots affected by proposed easements or easements of record, which cannot be
relinquished or relocated, shall be redesigned. All easements for off-site grading and
drainage shall be acquired prior to approval of construction on these properties. (Planning
Services)
31) The applicant shall provide cable or conduit for each residential lot for cable television and
Internet access. The applicant shall provide cable or conduit for fiber optics or other smart
technologies for each commercial lot for Internet access. The cable or conduit shall be
shown on the joint trench improvement plans and constructed before the final lift of asphalt
is placed on the adjacent street. (Planning Services)
32) Private streets or alleys shall be private facilities and shall have private street maintenance,
street sweeping and streetlights. Private streets shall have a visible demarcation between the
public and private areas and identified with signage that which differentiates them from
public streets. The City Engineer shall approve all signage for private facilities with the
approval of individual improvement plans for the project. (Planning Services)
33) The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's) filed for each
development shall be prominently displayed in the project sales office at all times. The
CC&R's shall apply to both owners and renters. The CC&R's shall be written to require
renters to comply with the regulations of the CC&R's, and a copy of the CC&R's shall be
given to each renter. (Planning Services)
34) The applicant shall provide a master signage program and a "Master Model Home Signage"
program for all residential subdivisions in the Bristol community. The master signage
programs shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager. (Planning Services)
35) Design and placement of walls and fences shall be in accordance with the standards in the
FDP and shall be approved by the Planning Manager. Walls and fences may be phased for
each development in the. (Planning Services)
36) All residential dwellings shall display illuminated street numbers in a prominent location in
such a position that the numbers are easily visible to approaching emergency vehicles from
both directions. The numbers shall be of a contrasting color to the background to which they
are attached and four (4) inches minimum in height. Flag lots will have their address
displayed in a prominent position at the driveway intersection with the street. (Planning
Services)
37) Prior to front yard landscaping installation by the applicant, plant species, location, container
size, quality and quantity of all landscaping plants and materials shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Manager for consistency with the approved construction plans. All
plant replacements shall be to an equal or better standard than originally approved.
(Planning Services)
Prior to the Issuance of Final Map
38) Fire Hydrant spacing and placement should be consistent with the City of Rohnert Park
Standards, comply with Appendix C of the 2007 California Fire code, and the amendments
to table C105.1 by RPDPS ordinance 9793. Specific locations of Fire hydrants shall be
coordinated with the applicants Civil Engineer based on Fire Engine response protocols.
(Department of Public Safety -Fire)
39) All roadway, private lanes and drives shall comply with the City of Rohnert Park Standards.
Specifically reference Standard #202 "Alley, in regards to:
o Alley lighting shall meet the City's minor street requirements.
o 20 or more units will require a 24' alley width
o Alleys are to be use as secondary access only, with parking provided on primary
access roads.
(Department of Public Safety -Fire)
40) Roadway widths should be consistent with the City of Rohnert Park Standards, or as
modified by approved tentative map, comply with Appendix D of the 2007 California Fire
code, and the amendments to RPDPS ordinance #793 Section 15.28.13103.2 — 15.28.1)106.1.
(Department of Public Safety -Fire)
41) Minimum interior and exterior turning radius for Fire Apparatus Access shall be all 20 feet
and 40 feet. (Department of Public Safety -Fire)
42) The Maintenance Agreement and Maintenance Management Plan for the stormwater water
quality pond shall include a requirement that any vegetation in the pond be cut or mowed
each May and/or shall otherwise be maintained to eliminate a buildup of vegetation.
(Department of Public Safety -Fire)
43) The City shall have no obligation to maintain private alleys, or police the private
maintenance of the alleys. (Engineering Services)
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits/Approval of Improvement Plans
44) Copies of the soils and geology reports and shall be reviewed and approved by the
developer's soils engineer and geologist prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
developer's soils engineer shall sign the plans stating that they conform to the soils report
recommendations. (Building Services)
45) All areas to be graded and left undeveloped shall have a revegetation plan as part of the dust
control program. The Development Services Director or his designee shall review and
approve the plan. The applicant shall guarantee the revegetation prior to issuance of grading
permits. (Planning Services)
46) The applicant shall provide adequate vehicle sight distance as specified by the State of
California, Department of Transportation's Highway Design Manual (latest edition) at all
public and private street intersections. In addition, intersections and driveways shall comply
with City requirements for sight triangles. The design of the streets shall incorporate public
safety concerns, fire protection equipment movements, as well as the location and pickup of
solid waste. (Planning Services)
47) The applicant shall show the proposed structural sections for all private streets on the site
improvement plans and pay the City's plan check and inspection fee for the proposed private
improvements, including the water, recycled water, sewer and storm drainage facilities in
these areas, to assure that the improvements are designed and constructed to City standards.
(Planning Services)
48) Safety lighting at the end and at any curve in any private street, alley, lane or place shall be
provided for residential units that do not front on a public street. The lighting shall include
individual lights on each residential unit and\or streetlights on street light poles. The City
Engineer shall approve the lighting plans that include these facilities. (Planning Services)
49) The applicant shall contact the solid waste franchised hauler and obtain their written
approval of the proposed solid waste pickup locations on private streets, alleys, lanes or
places. The pickup locations shall not be located in emergency vehicle access easements. A
copy of the written approval from the solid waste franchised hauler shall be submitted with
the street improvement plans for City review and approval. Provisions for paved areas for
trash receptacles on certain parcels shall be identified in the improvement plans to service
alley access residences; the trash receptacle cutouts shall be located on private parcels
fronting public streets and accommodate the receptacles for the respective lots. (Planning
Services)
50) Where required, the landscaping for the detention and/or retention basins shall be reviewed
and approved by the Planning Manager. (Planning Services)
51) The applicant will coordinate with the local bus system authority to facilitate local bus
service in the project and to determine bus stop locations and shelter improvements. The bus
shelter locations shall be shown on the improvement plans and reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer. A copy of the written correspondence with the local bus system authority
approving transit facilities shall be submitted with the first street improvement plans for each
map. (Planning Services)
52) Any above ground utility structures and appurtenances (e.g. cable TV boxes, phone splice
boxes) shall be limited to 36" in height, installed in a public utilities easement within the
applicant's property and within 10 feet behind street face of curbs. These locations shall be
screened with landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. The landscape screen
shall not interfere with the utility companies' or DPS's access. (Planning Services)
53) Electrical and water services shall be provided to all parks, landscape medians, and other
landscape areas in accordance with plans approved by the Public Works Director. (Planning
Services)
54) The improvement plans shall include placement of a fire hydrant at the north terminus of
each of the three motor courts. The hydrants shall be located in a public water line easement
and served by the water main in Keiser Avenue. Final placement of the hydrants shall be
approved by the Department of Public Safety. The fire hydrants shown on the Vesting
Tentative Map may be adjusted as approved by the Department of Public Safety.
(Department of Public Safety -Fire)
55) As part of the improvement plan/ final map submittal package, an exhibit shall be submitted
delineating improvements to be maintained by the HOA, the CFD, and private homeowner's.
(Engineering Services)
56) Improvement Plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted for the
review and approval of the City Engineer showing grading, paving, utilities, drainage,
structures to be built, lighting and trash collection. The improvements plans shall include
parking lots, street and utility information including all concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk,
striping and signing, paving, water lines, storm drain lines and sewer lines as necessary,
erosion control and any necessary transitions. All improvements shall be in accordance with
the City of Rohnert Park Standard Improvement Details. Improvement Plans shall include a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan including winterization and erosion protection.
(Engineering Services)
57) Storm drainage improvements shall be designed in accordance with the Sonoma County
Water Agency criteria. Hydrology calculations, pipe sizing and storm drain plans shall be
submitted for the review and approval of the City Engineer. (Engineering Services)
58) No lot- to- lot drainage is allowed except where easements for drainage are provided. No
drainage may discharge across sidewalks. (Engineering Services)
59) The applicant shall demonstrate for each building pad to the satisfaction of the City of
Rohnert Park as follows:
a) Adequate protection from 100 -year frequency storm; and
b) Feasible access during a 10 -year frequency storm.
(Engineering Services)
60) Fire protection shall be in accord with the requirements of Rohnert Park Public Safety
Department. With the submittal of the improvement plans, calculations shall be provided to
the City and the Rohnert Park Public Safety Department to ensure that adequate water
pressures are available to supply hydrant flows and sprinkler flows. (Engineering Services)
61) The improvement plans shall show a sewer lateral to each building in accord with City
Standards. (Engineering Services)
62) If private sewer lines are shared or if they cross property lines, a 10' private sewer easement
shall be shown in the Final Map / Parcel Map. The maintenance of any private sewer line
shall be included in the maintenance agreement for the overall site(s) which have an interest
in the particular sewer. (Engineering Services)
63) Right-of-way for Keiser Avenue shall be dedicated in fee to the City of Rohnert Park as
shown on the Vesting Tentative Map. Right dedication shall include the southern half of the
existing 40' roadway easement and an additional 16' of right-of-way to the south.
(Engineering Services)
64) Offsite Improvements: Improvements in Keiser Avenue are generally non-existent, including
surface improvements (pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, and landscaping),
wet utilities (potable water, sanitary sewer, recycled water, and storm drains), and dry
utilities (electric, gas, phone, and cable). In addition, there is an existing overhead pole line
along the south side of the street that is in conflict with surface improvements.
Prior to or concurrent with the intract improvement construction, the following offsite
improvements shall be completed:
Extension of a 12" sanitary sewer from Hinebaugh Creek north on Snyder Lane to
Keiser Avenue, and extension of an 8" sanitary sewer from Snyder Lane east on
Keiser Avenue to the project entry street. The sewer improvements are not currently
subject to PFFP reimbursement. The City shall pursue addition of the 12" sewer to
the PFFP program to provide for PFFP fee credits — in the event that the City should
not be successful in incorporating the sewer into the PFFP fee credit program, then
the 12" sewer in Snyder Lane shall be eligible for reimbursement from future
development based on the percentage of the number of units to the total capacity of
the sewer.
Extension of a 10" water main from Snyder Lane east on Keiser Avenue to the east
edge of the property. PFFP fee credits shall be granted for the cost of construction of
the 10" water main. Calculations shall be provided to demonstrate that fire flow and
pressure will be available in the proposed Keiser Avenue water main extension.
Adequate fire flow and pressure may be dependent on connection of the Keiser
Avenue main to the Kerry Road water main extension from Hinebaugh Creek to
Keiser Avenue by Brookfield Homes. Should the development proceed in advance
of the Kerry Road improvements, the Developer shall demonstrate that adequate fire
flow and pressure is available to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Safety
through the dead-end Keiser Avenue extension, OR the Developer shall complete the
Kerry Road connection, OR the Developer shall complete other improvements
needed to provide adequate fire flow and pressure.
• Extension of storm drain from Snyder Lane to the east boundary of the project. PFFP
fee credits shall be granted for the cost of construction of the storm drain.
• Extension of joint trench facilities from Snyder Lane to the east edge of the project.
Undergrounding of the existing pole line along the project frontage will be
accomplished with the installation of the joint trench facilities.
• Construction of Keiser Avenue surface improvements, including 34' wide pavement
section (face of curb to face of curb), and curb and gutter on the south side of the
street, from Snyder Lane to the east edge of the project. PFFP fee credits shall be
granted for the cost of the Keiser Road surface improvements.
(Engineering Services)
65) Full improvement of the Keiser Avenue project frontage will be required. Improvements will
include sidewalk, street lighting, street trees and landscaping, and any other items not
included in the City's CIP project. (Engineering Services)
66) Extension of a sanitary sewer to the site will be required. The sanitary sewer extension will
extend in Snyder from the existing College Trunk Sewer near Hinebaugh Creek north to
Keiser Avenue, then east in Snyder Lane to the project. The City is including the sanitary
sewer line in the design of its' Keiser Avenue CIP project, but has not funded the sanitary
sewer work. The Developer will need to fund the full cost of the sanitary sewer construction,
and may enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City for reimbursement from other
properties tying into the sewer main when those properties develop.
Developer shall pay all costs associated with the design and construction of the sanitary
sewer, which shall include improvement plans and specifications. Following receipt of an
Engineer's Estimate for construction of the improvements, the City will request funding
from Developer in the amount of: 1) the Engineer's Estimate, 2) 10% for construction
contingencies, 3) the estimated cost of inspection and construction management, and 4)
design costs (collectively referred to as the "costs"). Within 30 days of City's request for
funding, the Developer shall pay to City the amount of 50% of the Costs. Upon opening of
bids for construction of the work, the City will request funding from the Developer for the
remaining 50% of the work, with the request adjusted to reflect actual construction bids. The
Developer shall pay the remaining 50% of the costs within 30 days of the City's request. In
the event that Developer fails to pay the final 50% of the costs or any portion thereof, it shall
become delinquent thirty (30) days after the due date. Payment that is not paid by this date
shall be subject to a penalty of ten percent (10%) for each calendar month in which all or any
part of any monthly installment remains delinquent.
In the event that the construction is unreasonably delayed and City has terminated the
contract with the contractor, City shall notify Developer of the termination of the contract
and Developer may pursue permitting, design, construction and installation of the sanitary
sewer, subject to City inspections and acceptance. Upon Developer's completion of
construction and City's acceptance of improvements, Developer shall be entitled to
reimbursement for actual costs against funds previously collected by the City for this work,
to the extent that reimbursement will not exceed the amount of funds collected and not
utilized under the City's CIP project. (Engineering Services)
67) Calculations shall be provided to demonstrate that fire flow and pressure will be available in
the proposed Keiser Avenue water main extension, in advance of connection to the Kerry Road
water main extension to Keiser Avenue, should the development proceed in advance of the
Kerry Road improvements. (Engineering Services)
68) Recycled water shall be utilized for irrigation. WELO calculations shall be provided with the
landscape plans. Irrigation design shall be in conformance with the City of Santa Rosa
Recycled Water User's Guide. (Engineering Services)
69) The City has included the extension of a recycled water main in Keiser Avenue from Snyder
Lane to Kerry Road in its' third phase of the Keiser Avenue CIP project. Prior to the
extension of the recycled water main, the developer shall temporarily use potable water for
irrigation. The City's Per Acre for Development water connection fee shall not be paid due
to temporary use of potable water on the site. Developer shall pay the water consumption
charges to City for potable water actually used at the site for irrigation. (Engineering
Services)
70) All existing overhead utilities within the subdivision and all proposed utilities shall be placed
underground. In addition, the existing overhead power line along the south side of the Keiser
Avenue frontage shall be placed underground. The City has included the undergrounding of
the Keiser Avenue line and construction of joint trench dry utilities along Keiser Avenue in
its' CIP project. The joint trench design will include utilities needed to serve the
development. In the event that the improvements are not completed prior to approval of
improvement plans, the applicant will be responsible for construction of the joint trench
improvements, from Snyder Lane to the easterly end of the development. The applicant
would be eligible for Public Facilities Fee Program (PFFP) fee credits for any improvements
included in the PFFP. (Engineering Services)
71) The development shall include the design and construction of utilities within existing or
proposed public right-of-way for electric, gas, telephone, communication and cable TV shall
be submitted to the City Engineer and Director of Development Services for review and
approval. Any above -ground utility boxes, cabinets or structures shall be specifically
approved by the City and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of
Development Services and City Engineer. (Engineering Services)
72) A grading permit application shall accompany submittal of the each phase of Subdivision
Improvement Plans. Said application shall include the requirements listed in Sections 15.48
& 15.50 of the Municipal Code. The grading plans shall be in conformance with the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District guidelines for reducing construction impacts and
minimize dust emissions. (Engineering Services)
73) Each phase of development shall submit drainage plans subject to the review and approval of
the Sonoma County Water Agency ("SCWA"), the City of Rohnert Park and these
conditions of approval. Said plans shall meet or exceed SCWA standards and City
standards, whichever is more restrictive. All proposed building finished floor elevations,
including garages, shall be a minimum of 1 foot above the post construction 100 -year water
surface elevations. (Engineering Services)
74) The water quality/detention basin shall be designed to be in compliance with the current
Phase 1 Storm Water Permit issued by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control
Board for Sonoma County. Improvements shall be in conformance with the City of Santa
Rosa Technical Guidance Manual. The pond shall provide 100% volume capture for the 1 -
year, 24-hour storm. In addition, the project shall provide detention that limits runoff to pre -
construction levels for the 10 -year and 100 -year storm. The basin shall be provided with a 5 -
mm. trash screen in accordance with current State stormwater requirements for trash capture.
The pond shall drain via gravity and no pumps will be allowed. The pond shall be not be
subject to groundwater intrusion. The pond shall be located in a parcel dedicated to the City.
The access gate to the basin shall be relocated from Keiser Avenue to the internal street.
(Engineering Services)
75) The development shall prepare improvement plans and calculations for the proposed project,
shall demonstrate no increase in the 100 -year water surface elevations of adjacent properties
and submit hydrology and hydraulic report(s) for the project demonstrating that this
requirement is met, subject to Sonoma County Water Agency and City of Rohnert Park
review and approval. (Engineering Services)
76) The development shall include the design by the project proponent for Erosion and Sediment
control plans prepared by a professional such as a Civil Engineer or certified Erosion Control
Specialist and shall meet the requirements listed in Section 15.52.030 of the Municipal Code.
The plans shall provide measures to avoid the introduction or spread of noxious weeds into
previously un -infested areas. These plans are subject to review and approval by the City.
Erosion and Sediment control plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 15.52 of the
Municipal Code except that the reference document for design criteria shall be the City of
Santa Rosa Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP) or most current City
adopted SUSMP. (Engineering Services)
77) The development shall include design by the project proponent of Street lighting on public
streets as well as private streets/alleys. The design shall be in accordance with City
standards and P.G.&E. requirements. In addition, lighting for private streets and alleys shall
be designed in accordance with the Zoning ordinance and to the Public Safety Department's
satisfaction. (Engineering Services)
78) Each phase of development shall include design by the project proponent for roadways. The
design shall include slurry sealing specifications, subject to review and approval by the City.
All streets shall be slurry sealed prior to issuance of the last certificate of occupancy or prior
to acceptance of the public improvements, whichever occurs first within each phase of
development.
79) Each phase of development shall include the design by the project proponent for installation
of moisture barriers at the edges of all pavement sections for purposes of maintaining
constant moisture content of pavement sections, subject to review and approval by the City.
The design shall include moisture protection extending to 6 inches below the aggregate base
layer. The moisture barrier shall be a minimum of 4 inches wide and consist of Controlled
Low Strength Material (CLSM) in a 10 mil visqueen lined trench or approved alternative
method. (Engineering Services)
80) Soils beneath all roadways including alleys shall be lime treated based on site specific tests
and as recommended by a geotechnical engineer. (Engineering Services)
81) Each phase of development shall include design by the project proponent and all public
improvements shall comply with the latest version of the Rohnert Park Manual of Standards,
Details and Specifications. Reference to particular standards shall be made on the
improvement plans. Standards details and specifications shall not physically be included on
the plans but shall be referenced. (Engineering Services)
82) For each phase of development the project proponent shall design alleys, with utilities and
appurtenances. These shall be private. (Engineering Services)
83) No utilities (sewer, water or storm drains) shall flow from a private utility to a public utility
and back to a private utility. No utilities (sewer, water or storm drains) shall flow from a
public utility to a private utility and back to a public utility. (Engineering Services)
84) All utilities shall be located within dedicated and accepted public street rights-of-way. Any
exception must receive prior approval from the City Engineer. (Engineering Services)
85) All existing wells and septic systems shall be abandoned in compliance with State and
County codes, prior to issuance of an initial grading permit. The existing well and septic
system serving the existing residential dwelling may remain in operation until such time as
the particular phase of development requires abandonment of the systems, subject to review
and approval by the City. (Engineering Services)
86) For each phase of the development the project proponent shall design all utilities in
compliance with City Manual of Standards and the California Department of Public Health
Drinking Water Program including vertical and horizontal separation between utilities, curbs,
gutters and monuments. (Engineering Services)
87) The applicant shall aubmit a copy of the CCRs and/or maintenance declarations for private
improvements (such as for maintenance of alleys and private utilities) to the City Engineer
and City Attorney for review and approval. Maintenance declaration(s) shall be submitted
prior to recordation of Final Map. (Engineering Services)
88) The applicant shall submit to the City of Rohnert Park for review and approval, evidence that
the CC&R's will include provisions for maintenance of:
a) Private storm drain systems.
b) The private motor courts
c) Utilities within private easements, driveways or alleys, except where located
in a public easement
d) Private landscaping (including side or frontyard landscaping located outside
of home fences).
e) Sidewalks in private areas
f) Mailboxes and associated lighting and waste receptacles.
(Engineering Services)
89) The following Construction Mitigation Measures shall be noted on and/ or incorporated into
the grading and improvement plans:
a. For any project requiring (as part of MMP) an on-site inspector to monitor grading,
housing construction and/or development, the applicant shall deposit funds with the
City to cover the full cost of an inspector prior to any land disturbance. The City
Engineer, as appropriate, shall approve the amount and hire the inspector.
b. The developer shall comply with construction hours pursuant to Rohnert Park
Municipal Code Section 9.44.120.
c. All construction material waste and other debris shall be recycled to the extent
feasible. The applicant shall present a "clean site everyday" program to City building
staff for approval. The program shall include on-site signage in English and Spanish
to be posted at construction entrances.
d. No animals shall be brought on site by construction personnel during work hours.
e. All material storage areas shall be fenced with at least a 6 -foot high chain link fence
with at least two separate points of access with sufficient width for emergency
vehicles. The access points shall be shown on the construction fire and security
protection site plan.
f. The project shall comply with Biological Assessment prepared by Johnson Marigot
Consulting LLC, dated August 2017.
(Engineering Services)
Prior to Approval of Final Map
90) Unless otherwise specified in these conditions, the conditions shall apply prior to recordation
of each final map or large lot final map. A "final map" shall mean a map that results in
buildable parcels of an acre or less in area. A "large lot final map" shall mean a map that
results in parcels larger than one acre in area. (Planning Services)
91) The final map shall be prepared by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer, showing all parcels,
rights-of-way, and easement(s). (Engineering Services)
92) The final map shall be submitted with a completed Land Development Review Submittal
Sheet, Final Map Completeness Checklist and Final Map Submittal Checklist as available on
the City web -site and any and all applicable fees. (Engineering Services)
93) The final map submittal shall include a title report (within last 30 days), supporting
documents, and calculations for City Engineer review. All calculated points within the map
shall be based on one common set of coordinates. All information shown on the map shall be
directly verifiable by information shown on the closure calculation printout. The point (s) of
beginning shall be clearly defined. All lot acreages shall be shown on the map and shall be
verifiable from information shown on the closure calculation printout. (Engineering
Services)
94) The local agency sheet of the final map shall include the following note:
"Prior to the issuance of building permits, all applicable development impact fees
shall be paid to the satisfaction of the Building Official and in accordance with City
and local district ordinances."
(Engineering Services)
95) The Owner's Statement and Acknowledgement shall include the following language:
"The undersigned further relinquishes to the City of Rohnert Park all interest in sub-
surface water rights below 300 feet that they may have".
(Engineering Services)
96) The final map shall satisfy Rohnert Park Municipal Code section 16.14.010 D. 2. regarding
dedication of rights-of-way and easements. The final map shall show dedication of the
necessary right-of-way in fee title, sidewalk easements, public utility easements and other
easements for public water, sewer, and storm drain, as shown on the tentative map or as
needed per the final improvement design. (Engineering Services)
97) Prior to the approval of the final map, the applicant shall provide evidence that its surveyor
has been retained to set all monuments required by the map. (Engineering Services)
98) The final map shall identify who is responsible to own and maintain all parcels to be created
with the map. (Planning Services)
99) A Community Facilities District or any other funding mechanism allowed by law shall be
formed by the project proponent encompassing the entire tentative map property for the
purposes of funding the long-term maintenance of the public facilities built with the project.
The City shall be named as a third -party beneficiary to the district/association. A Covenant,
Condition and Restriction shall be placed on the formation that requires; that if the property
owners of the district vote to dissolve the district, a homeowner's association shall be formed
for the purposes of maintaining the facilities previously maintained by the district. The CFD
shall be created and the assessments levied prior to filing the final map. The CFD shall be
responsible for providing funds to maintain the following improvements or services:
a) Street surface improvements (pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, and striping
and markings
b) Storm drains located in the public right-of-way or public drainage easements.
c) Street lighting
d) Landscaping located in the public right-of-way or public landscape maintenance
easements.
e) The water quality pond and associated landscaping
f) The walkway connection to the middle school and any associated landscaping or
lighting
g) Police services
h) Fire and Emergency Medical services
(Engineering Services)
100) Prior to the approval of any final map the applicant shall provide the Development Services
Director with a copy of the recorded covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's) on the
deeds for all lots within the project site, which inform subsequent property owners of the
nature and extent of existing agricultural activities, operations, and facilities in the vicinity of
the project site. The deed restriction shall also provide notice of the potential conflicts or
effects of typical agricultural activities outside of project including but not limited to noise,
odors, dust, agricultural spraying, livestock and burning etc.
a. Any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) applicable to the project property
shall be consistent with the terms of these conditions and the City Code. If there is
conflict between the CC&R's and the City Code or these conditions, the City Code or
these conditions shall prevail.
101) The homeowners' association shall be responsible for maintaining all common facilities
pertaining to the Home Owners Association, including but not limited to, the association's
property, common drive aisles, private lighting, private landscaping, and private utilities, any
security patrol services, if provided, and any other functions of a homeowners' association.
The homeowners' association shall comply with all NPDES permit Best Management
Practices in effect at the time. (Planning Services)
102) The CC&R's shall prohibit the on-site parking of recreational vehicles, including boats.
Parking shall be prohibited along emergency vehicle access easements, private streets and
alleys. The No Parking signs shall be approved by the DPS. A separate signing and striping
plan shall be provided to address on-site stop signs and no parking areas prior to approval of
any final map. (Planning Services)
103) Prior to or concurrent with approval of the final map, the applicant shall enter into an Public
Improvement and Termination and Supersession of Deferred Improvement Agreement to
assure construction and completion of the public improvements shown on the map. Said
agreement shall specify and be accompanied by the financial assurances required to ensure
completion of the public improvements. (Engineering Services)
104) Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall identify a direct access point from the
project site to the neighboring school site (Lawrence Jones Middle School). This access
point shall be formalized through an agreement with the School District and access
walkways/gates shall be maintained in perpetuity. The access improvements shall include a
pathway a minimum of 4' in width, contained within a minimum 8'wide public access
easement or separate parcel. The pathway shall extend from the internal public street to the
School District property. Pathway improvements shall continue onto the School District
property as needed to connect to the school walkway system. The pathway shall be ADA
compliant, with landscaping and safety lighting. Graffiti -resistant screening/ fencing shall be
provided along with side of the easement to screen adjoining residences.
In the event that despite good faith efforts to provide the access to the neighboring school
site the applicant is unsuccessful in obtaining School District approval for the pathway
connection, then the applicant shall provide evidence of action by the school district to
prevent such access. (Planning Services)
105) Prior to the approval of the final map, the applicant shall secure all necessary rights-of-way
and easements for both onsite and offsite road, utility, and drainage facilities. Rights -of- way
and easements shall be dedicated on the map or provided by grant deed. The developer shall
prepare all necessary legal descriptions and deeds. (Engineering Services)
106) Prior to City Council approval of the final map; the developer shall satisfy Rohnert Park
Municipal Code section 16.14.010 D. 2. regarding off-site dedication of rights-of-way and
easements. (Engineering Services)
107) Prior to City Council approval of the final map, the proposed sidewalk and landscaping
along the entire project frontage of Keiser Avenue, as well as the water quality pond
landscaping and the middle school path connection shall be designed by the project
proponent, shown on improvement plans and reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
and included in Subdivision Agreement to be constructed with the first phase of construction.
(Engineering Services)
108) The final map shall have a note on the local agency page stating "All fences, sound walls and
retaining walls shall be constructed on private property and maintained by the private
property owner, unless specifically dedicated to and accepted by the City". (Engineering
Services)
109) Monumentation shall be provided to allow the re-establishment of all property corners of lots
within the subdivision, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering Services)
110) Prior to the approval of the first final map including a large lot final map, the applicant shall
be responsible for costs of implementation of ensuring compliance with Mitigation Measures
contained in Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) for the FEIR. The applicant shall provide
funding, in an amount determined by the Planning Manager to hire consultants or staff to
implement compliance monitoring. (Planning Services)
111) Prior to approval of the first final map, the street name and a theme for all street name
signage, including traffic signal signage, street corner signage, directional signs, and other
permanent fixtures depicting street names shall be submitted to the Planning Manager for
review and approval. (Planning Services)
112) Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall pay a park -in -lieu fee in the
amount of $248,816.00. (Planning Services)
113) The applicant shall submit a mailbox plan (locations and sizes) for all lots prior to approval
of any final map. The plan shall be approved by the Rohnert Park Post Office and included
with the first submittal of the improvement plans. The applicant shall submit to the City a
written confirmation from the Rohnert Park Post Office that the mailbox locations are
approved. The City will review and approve the location plan to ensure adequate site
distance and traffic safety measures are incorporated. (Building Services)
Prior to Construction
114) Applicant must file a Notice of Intent to Comply with the Terms of General Permit to
Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (NOI) with the State of
California Water Resources Control Board, and obtain a permit, prior to commencement of
any construction activity. (Engineering Services)
115) No construction shall be initiated for each phase until the Improvement Plans have been
approved by the City, all applicable fees have been paid, an encroachment permit and/or
grading permit has been issued and a project schedule has been submitted to the City
Engineer and a pre -construction conference has been held with the City Engineer or his
designee. (Engineering Services)
116) Developer shall secure an encroachment permit from the City prior to performing any work
within the City right of way, a State Highway or constructing within a City easement.
(Engineering Services)
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
117) Unless otherwise specified in these conditions, the conditions of approval shall apply to each
building permit. (Planning Services)
118) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a designed weather
protection cover for the mailboxes for review by the Planning Manager.
119) Prior to issuance of a building permits for any single family residential unit, individual plot
plans shall be prepared by the project proponent, submitted and reviewed and approved by
the City. (Engineering Services)
120) Prior to the issuance of any building permit, irrigation plans shall be submitted to and
approved by Planning Staff and the City Engineer. Such plans shall be in substantial
conformance with the plan submitted as a part of this application. Recycled water shall be
used for irrigation of the project landscaping as feasible (landscaping within individual lots is
excluded from this requirement).
121) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each residential unit, the applicant shall pay an
Affordable Housing in -lieu fee in the amount established by the City Council at the time of
building permit issuance. This fee shall be based on the project's obligation of 6.3
affordable housing units (per UDSP, page 46). (Planning Services)
122) In each neighborhood, prior to the issuance of the first building permit for each tentative map
phase, the applicant shall install and maintain on-site display signs. The on-site display signs
shall indicate the location for future development of lighted and non -lighted parks and
commercial parcels, cul-de-sac openings, apartments, or higher density residential areas.
These signs shall be located in a manner to be clearly visible to all potential homebuyers in
the Bristol community. The signing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Manager for
review and approval prior to installation of the signs. (Planning Services)
Prior to the Building Occupancy
123) Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide a set of certified
escrow instructions reflecting City's demand for payment of the Regional Transportation Fee
for each lot affected by this fee per the Development Agreement by and between Signature
Homes and the City of Rohnert Park.
124) Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall provide a Phase
Occupancy Plan, demonstrating the order in which homes will be occupied and how access
will be provided to occupied homes, and how residents will be separated from ongoing
construction of remaining homes. (Engineering Services)
125) Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, all street, drainage and utility
improvements shall be substantially complete and operational, and all streets, sidewalks, and
other areas open to the public shall be free of construction material or activities, and shall be
fenced from remaining construction. (Engineering Services)
126) The middle school connection shall be completed and opened for use prior to occupancy of
the 21" home, but no late than six months after the occupancy of the first home.
(Engineering Services)
127) All buildings shall be connected to public water and sewer systems prior to occupancy.
Water and sewer service accounts shall be set up with the City Finance Department for each
structure with a building permit. (Planning Services)
128) The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and clearances from the Rohnert Park
Building and Public Safety Departments prior to occupancy of the project. (Planning
Services)
BRISTOL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
Gee Property
University District Specific Plan
EIR Consistency Review
19
0.[)"NERT ARR
�ALlFORI'��
City of Rohnert Park
Development Services
130 Avram Avenue
Rohnert Park, CA 94928-2486
FEBRUARY 2018
I. Introduction and Overview
University District Specific Plan
The proposed Bristol Residential Subdivision project (the "proposed project") would be constructed on
the Gee property within the University District Specific Plan (UDSP) area. The UDSP area consists of
approximately 300 -acres of lands located on each side of Hinebaugh Creek, south of Keiser Avenue, west
of Petaluma Hill Road, and north of Copeland Creek. The Plan area includes the Vast Oak property, the UD
LLC property, Gee property, Abu-Halawa (Linden) property, and property owned by the Cotati-Rohnert
Park Unified School District (CRPUSD).
The City approved the University District Specific Plan document (the "Specific Plan") in 2006 and
associated General Plan amendments were adopted and implemented. The Specific Plan guides
development of the UDSP area, which is intended to be a mixed-use pedestrian -oriented community
providing diverse residential opportunities and a commercial center to accommodate the needs of new
and existing neighborhoods; Sonoma State University students, faculty, and staff; and patrons of the City's
Community Center and the Green Music Center. The Specific Plan adopted in 2006 provides for
development of up to 1,645 total dwelling units, 126 second units, parks and open space, and 175,000
gross square feet (sf) of neighborhood serving commercial, retail, and office space.
The Bristol project proposes to develop a 42 -lot residential subdivision on the Gee property within the
UDSP area. The +/- 6.9 -acre project site is located in the northwest corner of the UDSP area, bordered by
Keiser Avenue on the north; the Lawrence E. Jones Middle School to the south; a community garden on
land leased from the school to the east; and an existing single family residence to the west. The Specific
Plan document assumed that the Gee Property would be developed with 42 low density residential units
on 4,500 square foot (sf) minimum lots.
University District Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and EIR Addendums
In 2006, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City prepared an EIR to
analyze the impacts associated with implementation of the 2006 Specific Plan (the "2006 EIR"). The 2006
EIR assumed development of a total of 1,610 dwelling units without secondary units (1,736 total units
including secondary units), and up to 250,000 square feet of commercial center/plaza uses (including a
hotel). Of the 1,610 total dwelling units in the UDSP, the 2006 EIR assumed that 318 units would be low
density residential with 42 of the units assigned to the Gee property. The 2006 EIR includes a project -level
analysis for the UD LLC and Vast Oak properties within the UDSP area and a program -level analysis for the
Abu-Halawa (Linden), Gee, and CRPUSD properties.
In 2014, proposed changes to the Specific Plan (the "2014 Project") were analyzed in a CEQA addendum,
Evaluation of Proposed Amendments to the University District Specific Plan (the "2014 Addendum"). The
features in the 2014 Project were to occur on the same site as the approved Specific Plan with proposed
amendments to include different locations for specific project features, changes to development acreage
and land use densities, changes to park sizes and locations, an increase to the size of a stormwater
detention basin, and new bike lanes. The 2014 Project proposed no changes to the total number of
residential units in comparison to the 2006 Specific Plan (1,645 total), but proposed to reconfigure the
gross acreage for each designation and change the number of residential units by land use designation.
For low density residential, the 2014 Project proposed to increase the total number of units from 318
units, as assumed in the 2006 EIR, to 380 units in total. Under the 2014 Project and consistent with the
2006 EIR, the Gee property was assumed to support development of 42 of the low density units. The
2
analysis in the 2014 Addendum concluded that the amended project would not result in new or more
severe impacts than were analyzed in the 2006 EIR. In April 2014, the City approved the 2014 Addendum
and amended the Specific Plan to include the proposed changes.
In 2016, the City prepared another CEQA addendum, Evaluation of the University District Water Tank (City
Tank #8) Project (the "2016 Addendum"), to analyze the revisions to the 2006 EIR resulting from new
project -level details for a water supply tank and storage infrastructure to serve the Specific Plan area the
"Water Tank Project"). While the 2006 Program EIR and the 2014 Addendum described and analyzed the
offsite water supply tank and associated access road and infrastructure, the specific project -level details
were unknown. The 2016 Addendum concluded that the proposed Water Tank Project would not result
in new or substantially more severe impacts than that disclosed in the 2006 Program EIR and 2014
Addendum.
In the 2006 Program EIR, 2014 Addendum, and 2016 Addendum potential impacts were analyzed from
the viewpoint of the following 13 environmental resource areas:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture Resources, Land Use and Planning
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Geology and Soils
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Noise
• Population and Housing
Public Services
• Transportation and Traffic
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Water Resources
In addition to the resource topics listed above, required CEQA considerations including growth -inducing
impacts, cumulative impacts, significant and unavoidable impacts, and significant and irreversible
environmental changes were also evaluated.
Based on the environmental analyses included in the 2006 EIR, the City determined that the Specific Plan,
in conjunction with cumulative development within the City of Rohnert Park, would result in a significant
and unavoidable impact associated with aesthetics/visual resources and land use as it relates to the loss
of open space lands; agriculture as it relates to the conversion of agricultural lands; the cumulative effect
on air quality, biological resources, and noise; traffic as it relates to increased congestion at Adobe
Road/Petaluma Hill Road in Penngrove, the East Cotati/Old Redwood Highway intersection, and the
Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road and Main Street/Old Redwood Highway intersections in Penngrove.
The 2006 EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would have significant and unavoidable
impacts to aesthetics/visual resources at it relates to the damage of scenic resources; agriculture as it
relates to the conversion of farm land to non-agricultural use; air quality as it relates to operational
increases in emissions beyond the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) threshold levels
and inconsistency with the 2000 Clean Air Plan; cultural resources as it relates to potential adverse impacts
on historic structures within the Specific Plan area; noise as it relates to exposure of existing offsite noise -
sensitive land uses to cumulative traffic noise; traffic as it relates to increased congestion at Adobe
Road/Petaluma Hill Road in Penngrove, the East Cotati/Old Redwood Highway intersection, and Adobe
Road/Petaluma Hill Road and Main Street/Old Redwood Highway intersections in Penngrove.
All other environmental impacts were determined to be less than significant or less than significant with
implementation of identified mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR. In compliance with CEQA, and to ensure
the effective implementation and enforcement of adopted mitigation measures, the City adopted a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the 2006 EIR. The MMRP was adopted
concurrently with the 2006 EIR.
Both the 2014 and 2016 Addendums concluded that their respective projects would be consistent with
the 2006 EIR and neither would result in new or substantially more severe impacts than those previously
disclosed and assessed in the 2006 EIR.
Note: The UDSP EIR and EIR Addendums are available for review during normal business hours at
City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928
Bristol Residential Subdivision Project
Because the site proposed for the Bristol residential development is located within the UDSP area, this
analysis has been prepared to evaluate the consistency of the proposed project with the 2006 EIR and EIR
Addendums. An overview of the proposed project is presented below.
Section II of this document discusses the environmental impacts included in the 2006 EIR, by resource
topic, followed by a brief analysis of the proposed project's environmental effects related to the EIR
impact conclusions and applicability of EIR mitigation measures. Project -specific studies were prepared
for the proposed project to determine if the project would result in any significant environmental impacts
that were not identified in the 2006 EIR. For a list of the technical studies prepared for the proposed
project, refer to Section IV References.
Project Description:
The proposed project would develop 42 single family residential lots on the approximately 6.9 acre project
site (Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) 045-253-009, 045-253-010, 045-253-011, and 045-253-012) within
the UDSP area. The proposed residential lots would be a minimum of 50' x 80' in size. 18 of the 42 lots
would be in a six-pack motor court configuration, with each group of six lots sharing a common 20' wide
private alley driveway. The remaining 24 lots would be front loaded with off street access. An
approximately .30 -acre park -like basin is proposed to be located the northwest corner of the property to
treat stormwater. The basin would be landscaped and maintained by the homeowners' association.
Additional landscaping along the Keiser Avenue frontage and throughout the subdivision is also proposed.
Vehicle access to the site would be provided from two connections to Keiser Avenue: one at the northwest
corner of the project site and the other at the northeastern corner. A new 32' wide public street would
bisect the subdivision, connecting the two site access points at Keiser Avenue. The street would potentially
be extended to connect to the adjoining property to the west in the future. The project proposes to
construct sidewalks along the Keiser Avenue frontage and throughout the subdivision
The proposed subdivision would provide a total of 213 parking spaces: 84 spaces would be for resident
parking (in garage); 84 spaces would be for residential visitor parking (in driveway); and 45 spaces would
be on -street visitor parking.
Bristol Project Location and Land Uses.
The Bristol project site is located in the northwest portion of the UDSP area, bordered by Keiser Avenue
on the north; the Lawrence E. Jones Middle School to the south; a community garden on land leased from
the school to the east; and an existing single family residence to the west.
4
As stipulated in the Specific Plan document, the land use designation for the proposed project site (the
Gee property) is Low Density Residential and the zoning designation is Specific Plan. The Specific Plan
document assumed that the Gee Property would be developed with 42 low density residential units on
4,500 square foot (sf) minimum lots.
EIR Impact Analysis Consistency Review
This section discusses the environmental impacts included in the 2006 EIR, by resource topic, followed by
a brief analysis of the proposed project's consistency with each of the impact conclusions and applicability
of the 2006 EIR mitigation measures.
AESTHETICS
AES -1: Obstruct or Adversely Affect Scenic Vistas or Change Visual Character during Construction
The 2006 EIR concluded that construction -related visual impacts in the Specific Plan area would be less
than significant for all viewers other than residents of Redwood Park Estates and significant for residents
of Redwood Park Estates. The 2006 EIR further concluded that, with implementation of Mitigation
Measure AES -1, which provides for installation of temporary visual barriers between construction zones
and residences at Redwood Park Estates, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Development of the Bristol project would be within the same development footprint as assessed in the
2006 UDSP project. Project construction near identified sensitive viewers would occur in similar areas and
for similar types of structures (e.g. height, massing and design) as described in the 2006 EIR. Development
intensities and densities at the site would consistent with the assumptions in the 2006 UDSP. No new
aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to scenic vistas or change
in visual character would occur under the proposed project.
AES -2: Obstruct or Adversely Affect Scenic Vistas or Change Visual Character during Operation
This impact was found to be less than significant in the 2006 EIR. The proposed development of low
density residential units on the proposed project site was anticipated in the 2006 UDSP. Thus,
implementation of the proposed project would not be expected to increase visual impacts. No new
aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior scenic vista impacts would be
expected to result from proposed project.
AES -3: Substantially Damage Scenic Resources, Including, but not limited to, Trees, Rock Outcroppings,
and Historic Buildings along a Scenic Highway during Construction and Operation
Development of the proposed Bristol project would not change effects identified in the 2006 EIR
associated with the change in land uses within the UDSP area from agriculture to urban on Petaluma Hill
Road, a designated scenic roadway. Development under the proposed project would occur within the
development footprint assessed in the 2006 UDSP EIR. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of the prior scenic resources impacts would be expected to result from implementation of the
proposed project.
AES -4: Create Temporary Sources of Light and Glare during Construction
As noted in the 2006 EIR, construction activities associated with development within the UDSP would
occur during normal business hours and would thus not create new sources of light and/or glare.
Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in
5
the 2006 EIR and construction activities would be consistent with other development within the UDSP
and occur during normal business hours. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of the prior light and glare impacts would be expected to result from the proposed project.
AES -5: Create Permanent Sources of Light and Glare
The 2006 EIR concluded that no substantial sources of glare would be created once the UDSP has been
constructed. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint
as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the
prior glare impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
The 2006 EIR concluded that development within the UDSP would increase the amount of light from the
site that adjacent residents view during the nighttime hours, where no light sources existed (at the time
of the preparation of the 2006 EIR). To ensure that lighting impacts remain less than significant, the 2006
EIR included Mitigation Measure AES -5a requiring lighting design to be shielded and directed downward
in compliance with City standards. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -5a, impacts
associated with the proposed project would be less than significant and consistent with the 2006 EIR.
Aonlicable EIR Mitieation Measures:
Mitigation Measure AES -5a: Require Lighting Design to be Shielded and Directed Downward in
Compliance with City Standards
AES -6: Conflict with Local Policies
The 2006 EIR concluded the UDSP was consistent with aesthetic, scenic corridor and lighting policies.
Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same development footprint as
assessed in the 2006 EIR. Therefore, the Bristol project would also be consistent with aesthetic, scenic
corridor and lighting policies. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior aesthetic
impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE AND PLANNING
AG -1: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to Non -
Agricultural Use
The 2006 EIR concluded development within the UDSP would not convert prime farmland, unique
farmland, or farmland of statewide importance to non-agricultural use. Development of the proposed
Bristol project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR, and
therefore would not affect any additional land. Therefore, no new impacts or a substantial increase in
the severity of any prior agricultural -related impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of
the proposed project.
AG -2: Conflict with Existing Zoning for Agricultural Use or a Williamson Act Contract— University District
Specific Plan Area
The 2006 EIR concluded that development of the UDSP would not conflict with agricultural zoning or with
Williamson Act Contracts. Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same
development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR, and therefore would not affect any additional land.
Therefore, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior agricultural -related impacts
would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
11
AG-3: Conflict with Existing Zoning for Agricultural Use or a Williamson Act Contract—Offsite Water
Tank Site
The 2006 EIR concluded that development of the UDSP would require cancellation of the Williamson Act
Contract on the water tank site. Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same
development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and would result in no changes to the water tank site.
No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior agricultural-related impacts would be
expected to occur with implementation of the Bristol project.
AG-4: Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Use
The 2006 EIR concluded development of the UDSP would convert farmland to non-agricultural use.
Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same development footprint as
assessed in the 2006 EIR and therefore would not affect any additional land. Therefore, no new impacts
or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior agricultural-related impacts would be expected to
occur with implementation of the proposed project.
LUP-1: Loss of Community Cohesion
The 2006 EIR concluded development of the UDSP would not impact an existing community but would
impact only vacant and previously farmed lands. Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur
within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and affect no other lands. Therefore
no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior land use impacts would occur with
implementation of the proposed project.
LUP-2: Conflict with Relevant Plans and Policies
The 2006 EIR concluded development of the UDSP would not conflict with adopted plans and policies for
the Specific Plan area, and the UDSP would be consistent with the General Plan. The proposed Bristol
project is consistent with the assumed uses for the site in the Specific Plan and compatible with adjacent
uses. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in any new conflicts with relevant plans
and policies.
LUP-3: Conflict with Conservation Plans
No conservation plans affecting the site were identified in the 2006 EIR and none have been adopted for
the site since 2006. Consequently, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior
land use impacts would occur under the proposed project.
LUP-4: Construction-Related Effects on Existing Land Uses
The 2006 EIR determined that the seven phases of development within the UDSP area could cause
potential temporary construction-related impacts to adjacent land uses. However, this impact was found
to be less than significant in the 2006 EIR. Because development of the proposed Bristol project would
occur within the development footprint assessed in the 2006 EIR, there would be no new impacts or a
substantial increase in the severity of any prior land use impacts.
LUP-5: Compatibility with Existing or Future Adjacent Land Uses
The proposed project would not result in land uses on the project site that are incompatible with existing
adjacent land uses. Development proposed with the Bristol project would occur within the development
footprint assessed in the 2006 EIR. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity
7
of any prior land use compatibility impacts would be expected to occur with development of the proposed
project.
AIR QUALITY
AQ -1: Significant Emissions of Pollutants from Construction of Buildings (Residential and Commercial)
for Proposed Development of the University District Specific Plan
The 2006 EIR concluded construction of the UDSP would result in significant air pollutant emissions.
Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same site development footprint as
assessed in the 2006 EIR and would be consistent with the assumptions included for the Gee property in
the Specific Plan and 2006 EIR. Therefore, the impact analyses and conclusions from the 2006 EIR for air
quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) and climate change would still be applicable. Implementation of the
2006 EIR Mitigation Measures AQ 1-a and AQ 1-b, which require that the project ensure consistency with
BAAQMD guidelines for reducing construction impacts, would ensure that construction related air quality
impacts remain less than significant. No new significant construction -related air quality impacts or a
substantial increase in the severity of any prior construction air quality impacts would be expected to
occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure AQ -1a: Minimize Dust Emissions and Ensure Consistency with Bay Area Air
Quality Management District Guidelines for Reducing Construction Impacts
Mitigation Measure AQ -1b: Implement Additional Control Measures to Minimize Construction -
Related Emissions of Criteria Pollutants
AQ -2: Operational Increases in Emissions beyond Bay Area Air Quality Management District Threshold
Levels
The 2006 EIR concluded development of the 2006 Project would result in significant reactive organic gases
(ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter
(PM10) emissions associated with vehicular traffic and area source emissions. Development of the
proposed project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and
would be consistent with the assumptions included for the Gee property in the Specific Plan and 2006 EIR.
Mitigation Measure AQ -2a requires residential projects within the UDSP to utilize measures, as identified
in the URBEMIS model, to minimize air pollutant emissions. With implementation of Mitigation Measure
AQ -2a, the proposed project would result in no new significant operations -related air quality impacts or
a substantial increase in the severity of any prior air quality impacts identified in the 2006 EIR.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AQ -2a: Utilize Measures Identified in URBEMIS 2002 Model to Minimize Air
Pollutant Emissions Associated with the Proposed Projects
AQ -3: Localized Increases in Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Intersections Affected by the
University District Specific Plan Development
The 2006 EIR found that development of the UDSP would result in increased CO concentrations, but the
increases were less than significant and no mitigation required. Because the proposed project is consistent
with the planned uses for the site in the Specific Plan and the 2006 EIR, no new significant operations -
related air quality impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior air quality impacts would
be expected to occur.
AQ -4: Creation of Objectionable Odors by Sources Associated with the University District Specific Plan
The 2006 EIR found that development within the UDSP would not cause odor impacts. Because the
proposed Bristol project site is within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and
would be consistent with the assumptions included for the Gee property in the Specific Plan and 2006 EIR,
there would be no change in this impact. No new significant odor impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of any prior odor impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the Bristol project.
AQ -5: Inconsistency with the 2000 Clean Air Plan Caused by Growth Associated with the University
District Specific Plan
The 2006 EIR concluded that the UDSP would be inconsistent with the 2000 Clean Air Plan due to increased
vehicle mile traveled (VMT) with the City of Rohnert Park General Plan and the UDSP. The 2006 EIR
determined that the inconsistency with the 2000 Clean Air Plan would result in a significant and
unavoidable impact.
The proposed Bristol project would be developed with the planned uses for the site, as assessed in the
2006 EIR. No new significant operations -related air quality impacts or a substantial increase in the severity
of any prior air quality impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Climate Change and GHG
The 2014 Addendum included an updated Air Quality study that quantified GHG resulting from the
approved Specific Plan and the 2014 Project and concluded that operation of the 2014 Project would not
generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the
environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of GHGs. Conclusions reached in the 2014 Addendum regarding GHG emissions would be
applicable to the entire Specific Plan, including the proposed project. No new significant operations -
related air quality impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any climate change and GHG impacts
would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
13I0-1: Direct Loss of Approximately 21.80 Acres of Waters of the United States (Including Wetlands)
and 6.57 Acres of Non -Jurisdictional Wetlands
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the Vast Oak portion of the UDSP would result in the
direct loss of an approximately 17.53 acres of waters of the United States, including wetlands, and 6.22
acres of waters of the state. Construction within UD LLC would result in direct loss of 0.10 acre of water
of the United States and 0.46 acre of waters of the state. Construction of the potable water tank would
impact 0.06 acre of waters of the United States. The 2006 EIR also stated that an additional 1.28 acres of
waters of the United States, including wetlands, would be filled during construction and restoration
activities on the Anderson 48 Mitigation Area. Since the 2006 EIR was certified, wetlands mitigation has
been completed on the Anderson 48 site and the scenic corridor on the Vast Oak East site. Development
of the Bristol project would occur on the Gee property in the Specific Plan area and would result in no
changes within the UD LLC or Vast Oak properties. Impact BIO -3, below, addresses the site-specific
wetland impacts associated with the proposed project.
BIO -2: Direct Loss of Approximately 0.06 Acre of Jurisdictional Seasonal Wetlands for Construction of
the Potable Water Pipeline and Access Road
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction for the potable water line and access road in Vast Oak East
would result in the direct loss of an approximately 0.06 acre of seasonal wetland. Development of the
proposed project would result in no changes to the potable water line. No new impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of the prior wetlands -related impacts would be expected to occur with
implementation of the proposed project
13I0-3: Potential Loss of Waters of the United States, Including Wetlands, on the Abu-Halawa, Gee, and
Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District Properties
As noted in the 2006 EIR, a wetlands survey was not conducted on the Abu-Halawa, Gee, or CRPUSD
properties. As such, the 2006 EIR included Mitigation Measure BIO -3 to require project proponents for
development on the Abu-Halawa, Gee, or CRPUSD properties to conduct a wetland evaluation of the
proposed development area to ensure that the site does not support potentially jurisdictional wetlands.
In compliance with Mitigation Measure BIO -3, a formal wetland delineation of the 6.9 -acre Bristol site
was completed on May 13 and July 31, 2014. On April 10, 2015, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
issued a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination for the project site, at which time they claimed
jurisdiction over the 0.34 -acre of seasonal wetland occurring on the western portion of the project site.
Because project implementation would require placement of fill in all 0.34 acre of onsite jurisdictional
waters, the project proposes to purchase 0.34 -acre of mitigation credits at a USACE-approved wetland
mitigation bank. Credits would be purchased at a 1:1 ratio, which is consistent with the USACE policies
regarding compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland loss and proof of purchase would be
provided to the USACE prior to project construction.
Furthermore, as indicated in the Nationwide Permit Authorization request for the project, the project
would also implement the following avoidance and minimization measures to avoid or minimize impacts
to jurisdictional wetlands, sensitive biological communities, and special -status species:
1. Within 48 hours prior to construction, a preconstruction survey of the project site will be
conducted for CTS. If any CTS are observed, salamanders will be collected and translocated
consistent with the measures outlined in Attachment C of the Programmatic Biological Opinion to
an appropriate breeding site as identified by the USFWS and CDFW.
2. If necessary, prior to any translocation, USFWS and CDFW will approve an appropriate
translocation site.
3. Prior to construction, fencing will be installed to exclude CTS from entering the project site.
4. An approved biological monitor will be onsite each day during initial site grading.
5. The biological monitor will conduct a training session for all construction workers prior to the
commencement of project -related site impacts.
6. During initial site grading, before the start of work each day, the biological monitor will check for
animals under any equipment such as vehicles and stored pipes. The biological monitor will check
all excavated steep -walled holes or trenches greater than one -foot -deep for any CTS. CTS will be
removed by the biological monitor and translocated as described in Attachment C of the
Programmatic Biological Opinion, or as directed by the USFWS.
7. An erosion and sediment control plan will be implemented to prevent impacts of construction on
habitat outside the work areas.
8. Access routes and number and size of staging areas and work areas will be limited to the minimum
necessary to achieve the project goals. Routes and boundaries of the roadwork will be clearly
10
demarcated prior to initiating construction/grading.
9. All foods and food -related trash items will be enclosed in sealed trash containers at the end of
each day, and removed from the site every three days.
10. No pets will be allowed within on the project site.
11. No more than a maximum speed limit of 15 mph will be permitted on the project site.
12. All equipment will be maintained such that there will be no leaks of automotive fluids such as
gasoline, oils, or solvents.
13. Hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, solvents, etc., will be stored in sealable containers in a
designated location that is at least 200 feet from offsite aquatic habitats. All fueling and
maintenance of vehicles and other equipment and staging areas will occur at least 200 feet from
offsite aquatic habitats.
14. Initial grading and clearing will be conducted between April 15 and October 15, of any given year,
depending on the level of rainfall and/or site conditions.
With implementation of these measures and the purchase of mitigation credits, impacts associated with
the loss of onsite wetlands would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Accordingly, no new impacts
or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts identified in the 2006 EIR would occur.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation measure BIO -3: Conduct a Wetlands Evaluation Prior to Development of the Abu-
Halawa, Gee, and Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District Properties
13I0-4: Disturbance of Riparian Vegetation
The 2006 EIR concluded that construction within the UDSP area could impact riparian vegetation along
Copeland and Hinebaugh Creeks but noted that measures included in the UDSP project would ensure that
the impact was less than significant. As discussed in the 2006 EIR, a riparian restoration plan was prepared
for implementation by the UD LLC and Vast Oak properties. Development of the proposed project would
occur on the Gee property which does not support riparian vegetation (Johnson Marigot 2017).
Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to riparian
vegetation, as identified in the 2006 EIR, would be expected to occur.
BIO -5: Potential Disturbance of Riparian Habitat during Construction
As discussed in Impact BIO -4 above, the 2006 EIR concluded that construction within the Vast Oaks and
UD LLC portion of the UDSP could impact riparian vegetation along Copeland and Hinebaugh Creeks. As
noted in Impact BIO -4 above, the Bristol project site does not support riparian habitat. Thus, disturbance
to riparian habitat during project construction would not be expected. Although the project would not
result in disturbance to riparian habitat during construction, the project would be required to implement
Mitigation Measure BIO -5, which requires the installation of construction barrier fencing to protect
sensitive onsite biological resources (see BIO -14 below), to ensure that inadvertent impacts to sensitive
biological resources remain less than significant.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO -5a: Install Construction Barrier Fencing to Protect Sensitive Biological
Resources Adjacent to the Construction Zone
BIO -6: Potential Disturbance of Oak Woodland
11
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area would potentially disturb oak
woodland adjacent to Keiser Road in the northern portion of the study area. The 2006 EIR indicated that
the UDSP would preserve this area as the future Oak Grove Park. Development of the proposed project
would have no impact to the oak woodland identified in the 2006 EIR. No new impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of the prior impacts to oak woodland habitat would be expected to occur with
implementation of the proposed project.
13I0-7: Potential Disturbance of Oak Woodland for Construction of the Potable Water Pipeline and Tank
The 2006 EIR concluded construction on the water tank site and installation of the potable water line
would potentially disturb oak woodland. Development of the proposed project would occur within the
same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and would result in no changes to the water tank
site. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to oak woodland habitat
would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
13I0-8: Potential Loss of Special -Status Plants
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area would avoid impacts to Lobb's aquatic
buttercup population on Vast Oak East, but could result in the potential loss of special status plant species
on the CRPUSD, Gee, and Abu-Halawa portions of the UDSP. To reduce potential impacts on special -status
plants to a less than significant level, the 2006 EIR included Mitigation Measure BIO -8a requiring special -
status plant surveys to be conducted on the CRPUSD, Gee, and Abu-Halawa properties within the Plan
area.
A Biological Assessment was prepared by Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC in August 2017 to evaluate the
potential effects of the proposed Bristol project on federally threatened, endangered, and proposed -listed
species, and their critical habitat. As noted in the Biological Assessment, a total of four federally listed
plant species are known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. However, the assessment concludes
that the proposed project would not be expected to affect any federally listed plant species. While the
grassland and seasonal wetland habitats present on the site do provide suitable habitat for the four
federally listed plant species, no occurrences of these or any other federally listed plant species have been
documented within or adjacent to the project site. Protocol rare plant surveys were conducted on the
project site in 2014 and 2015 and had negative findings (Johnson Marigot 2017). Accordingly, no new
impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to special status plant habitat would
be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO -8a: Conduct Special -Status Plant Surveys in the Cotati-Rohnert Park
Unified School District, Gee, and Abu-Halawa Portions of the Study Area
BIO -9: Disturbance of Central California Coast Steelhead and Degradation of Habitat
The 2006 EIR identified an approximately 1,700 -foot reach of Copeland Creek as a potential steelhead
migration corridor. The Biological Assessment prepared for the Bristol project (Johnson Marigot 2017)
noted that the Central California Coast Steelhead is known to occur in the project vicinity, but concluded
that the project would have no effect on the species due to unsuitable onsite habitat. The project site is
comprised of ruderal habitat and seasonal wetlands, neither of which are capable of supporting aquatic
species. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to
steelhead would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
BIO -10: Potential Disturbance of California Tiger Salamanders and Their Habitat
12
The 2006 EIR identified the potential for impacts to the California tiger salamander (CTS). Multi-year CTS
larval surveys conducted between 1994 and 2003 and five years of aquatic surveys conducted at the
Anderson 48 Mitigation Site between 2007 and 2011 confirm that CTS do not occur on the property. The
2014 Addendum prepared for the UDSP project noted that there has been no recent data to suggest that
development of the Vast Oak and UD LLC properties would impact CTS. The 2014 Addendum also noted
that the Vast Oak and UD LLC properties are outside the designated critical habitat for the Sonoma CTS.
Mitigation Measure BI0-10a included in the 2006 EIR requires the USFWS be contacted prior to
development within the CRPUSD, Gee, and Linden properties within the Plan area to determine whether
protocol -level upland surveys for CTS would be warranted. The measure further stipulates that if CTS are
present on any of those properties, the project proponent would be required to consult with USFWS to
obtain necessary permits and develop appropriate avoidance/minimization and compensation measures.
The Biological Assessment (Johnson Marigot 2017) prepared for the project determined that the Bristol
project site does provide marginal habitat for CTS, and as such, the proposed project "may affect, but is
not likely to adversely affect the federally listed California Tiger Salamander." The assessment noted that,
although it is unlikely CTS occurs on the project site, the fact that the site occurs within the Santa Rosa
Plain and provides suitable CTS upland habitat, in the absence of protocol -level CTS presence -absence
surveys, impacts to the species cannot be ruled out.
To mitigate for impacts to CTS and in compliance with 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure BI0-10a, the project
has initiated consultation with the USFWS to develop appropriate avoidance/minimization and
compensation measures. As outlined in Impact BIO -3 above, the project would implement several
measures designed to minimize impacts to CTS during construction. Additionally, the project proposes to
purchase CTS upland mitigation credits from a CDFW and USFWS-approved mitigation bank (Johnson
Marigot 2017). Per the Programmatic Biological Opinion, for projects greater than 1.3 miles from a known
breeding site and greater than 500 feet from an adult occurrence, impacts to CTS habitat require
mitigation at a 0.2:1 ratio. To mitigate impacts to 6.9 acres of ruderal grassland and seasonal wetland that
constitute suitable CTS upland habitat, the project would purchase of 1.38 acres of CTS upland mitigation
credits from a USFWS-approved conservation bank. The purchase of mitigation credits would serve to
mitigate impacts to CTS to a less than significant level. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of the prior CTS impacts identified in the 2006 EIR would be expected to occur
with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO -10a: Contact U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Determine whether
Protocol -Level Upland Surveys for California Tiger Salamander on the Abu-Halawa, Gee, and
Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District Properties Are Warranted
BIO -11: Potential Disturbance or Mortality of Foothill Yellow -Legged Frogs
The 2006 EIR indicated foothill yellow -legged frogs are known to occur in Copeland Creek within the UD
LLC portion of the UDSP area. Development of the proposed project would occur on the Gee property
within the UDSP and would result in no impacts to Copeland Creek. Accordingly, the project would not
result in new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior impacts to foothill yellow -legged
frogs identified in the 2006 EIR.
BIO -12: Potential Disturbance or Mortality of Northwestern Pond Turtles
The 2006 EIR indicated Northwestern pond turtle are known to occur in Copeland Creek or Hinebaugh
Creek. Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same development footprint
13
as assessed in the 2006 EIR and would not be expected to impact any greater segments of Copeland or
Hinebaugh Creeks. 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure BI0-12a, which requires preconstruction surveys for the
Northwestern Pond Turtles in suitable uplands (annual grassland within 1,300 feet of creeks), would be
applicable to the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -12a would ensure that the proposed
project is consistent with the 2006 EIR and results in no new impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of the prior impacts to Northwestern pond turtle.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure B10 -12a: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Northwestern Pond Turtles in
Suitable Uplands
BIO -13: Potential Loss or Disturbance of Breeding or Wintering Burrowing Owl
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area could potentially impact burrowing
owl habitat. The non-native annual grasslands and agricultural lands in the UDSP provide potential
burrowing owl nesting and foraging habitat. The 2006 EIR included Mitigation Measure BI0-13a, which
requires preconstruction surveys for burrowing owls, to reduce potential impacts to the species to a less
than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -13a would ensure that the proposed
project is consistent and results in no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior
impacts to burrowing owl habitat.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BI0-13a: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Active Burrowing Owl Burrows
and Implement the California Department of Fish and Game Guidelines for Burrowing Owl
Mitigation, if Necessary
BIO -14: Potential Disturbance of Special -Status and Non -Special -Status Tree-, Shrub-, and Ground -
Nesting Migratory Birds and Raptors
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area could potentially impact special status
and non -special status bird habitat and migratory birds. Implementation of 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
BIO -5a, discussed previously, along with Mitigation Measure BIO -14a, which provides measures for
avoiding impacts to nesting birds and raptors, would reduce potential construction -related impacts to
nesting birds a less than significant level. With implementation of these measures, the proposed project
would be consistent with the 2006 EIR and would result in no new impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of the prior impacts to nesting migratory birds and raptors.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO -5a: Install Construction Barrier Fencing to Protect Sensitive Biological
Resources Adjacent to the Construction Zone
Mitigation Measure BIO -14a: Avoid Disturbance of Tree-, Shrub-, and Ground -Nesting Special -
Status and Non—Special-Status Migratory Birds
BIO -15: Introduction or Spread of Noxious Weeds
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area could introduce the spread of noxious
weeds currently not in the area. Implementation of the guidelines outlined in Mitigation Measure 1310-
15a would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measure
14
BIO -15a, the project would be consistent with the 2006 EIR and result in no new impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of the prior impacts.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO -15a: Avoid the Introduction or Spread of Noxious Weeds into Previously
Uninfested Areas
CULTURAL RESOURCES
C-1: Adverse Impacts on P-49-3158
The 2006 EIR concluded project construction within the UDSP area could result in potential adverse
impacts to a late period archaeological site. Development of the proposed project would occur within the
same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of the prior cultural resources impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the
proposed project.
C-2: Adverse Impacts on P-49-3157, P-49-3159, and P-49-2796
The 2006 EIR concluded construction within the UDSP area could result in potential adverse impacts to
three other known prehistoric archaeological sites. Development of the proposed Bristol project would
occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. No new impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of the prior cultural resources impacts would be expected to occur with
implementation of the proposed project.
C-3: Potential Adverse Impacts on Historic Structures within the University District Specific Plan Area
The 2006 EIR concluded construction within the UDSP area could result in potential adverse impacts to
historic resources. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development
footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR on a site that supports no existing structures. Therefore, the project
would result in no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior cultural resources
impacts identified in the 2006 EIR.
C-4: Potential Impacts on Archaeological Sites
The 2006 EIR concluded that construction within the UDSP area could result in potential adverse impacts
to archaeological sites. Development of the proposed Bristol project would occur within the same
development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Consistent with 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure C -4a,
which requires the identification of archaeological sites in the UDSP area and the implementation of any
necessary further measures, a cultural resources evaluation was conducted for the project area by
Archaeological Resource Management (2014). The report concluded that no recorded archaeological sites
are within the project area and no significant cultural materials were encountered during a surface
reconnaissance. However, due to the limited visibility of the site from high brush and weeds and at the
request of a Native American representative, the report included a recommendation that a subsurface
archaeological testing program be carried out to determine the potential for subsurface archaeological
materials within the project area. Consistent with the report recommendations, a Subsurface
Archaeological Testing Program for the Gee Property Project was prepared in October 2017
(Archaeological Resources Management 2017). No cultural materials were recovered from test trenches
excavated during field testing and no further recommendations are made in the report (Archaeological
Resources Management 2017). Accordingly, this impact is less than significant and consistent with the
2006 EIR.
15
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure C -4a: Identify Archaeological Sites in the University District Specific Plan Area
and Implement Further Measures
C-5: Potential Impacts on Unidentified Buried Cultural Resources
The 2006 EIR concluded construction within the UDSP area could result in potential adverse impacts to
unidentified burial sites. To reduce this impact to a less than significant level, the project would implement
2006 EIR Mitigation Measure C -5a, which requires Native American and archaeological monitors to be
present during all ground -disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure C -5a also requires a monitoring plan
to be prepared outlining procedures to be followed in the event of an archaeological discovery. With
implementation of Mitigation Measure C -5a, impacts associated with unidentified buried cultural
resources would be less than significant. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the
prior cultural resources impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure C -5a: Implement a Monitoring Program for Buried Cultural Resources
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Surface Fault Rupture
The 2006 EIR indicated that it was very unlikely the development within the UDSP area would be impacted
by surface fault rupture. All improvements associated with the proposed project would occur within the
same development footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. The proposed project does not include any
operational activities that would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that
would result in any new or substantially more severe geologic or geotechnical impacts when compared to
the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR.
GEO-2: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Seismic Ground Shaking —University District Specific
Plan Area
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area could be impacted by seismic ground
shaking. Mitigation Measure GEO-2a, which requires compliance with the applicable Uniform Building
Code Standards, was included in the 2006 EIR to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The
proposed project would comply with Mitigation Measure GEO-2a to ensure potential impacts from
seismic ground shaking remain less than significant. The proposed project does not include any
operational activities that would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that
would result in any new or substantially more severe geologic or geotechnical impacts when compared to
the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-2a: Comply with Applicable Uniform Building Code Standards
GEO-3: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Liquefaction
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area would not be impacted by liquefaction
and noted that the earthwork (i.e. soil moisture conditioning and compaction) that would be conducted
to prepare the site for project construction would further reduce the susceptibility of native soils and
sediments at the project site to liquefaction. The Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration report prepared
16
for the project site (ENGEO 2017) evaluated the liquefaction potential for the soil encountered below the
assumed water table to a depth of 50 feet. The results of the liquefaction analysis found that sand layers
encountered in borings could be potentially liquefiable. The report states that liquefaction potential and
liquefaction settlement should be further evaluated during future design -level studies to confirm the
extent and variability of potentially liquefiable soils. Final recommendations regarding site grading and
foundation construction at the project site would be provided after additional site-specific exploration
has been undertaken. Compliance with the final, site-specific geotechnical recommendations for the site
would ensure that potential impacts resulting from liquefaction at the project site remain less than
significant and consistent with the 2006 EIR conclusions.
GEO-4: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Landslides and Other Types of Slope Failures
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP are would not be impacted by landslides or
slope failure. The UDSP area is generally level to gently sloping and, as noted in the 2006 EIR, no unstable
slopes or geologic units have been identified in the project vicinity. All improvements associated with the
proposed project would occur within the same development footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. The
proposed project does not include any operational activities that would create new environmental
impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new or substantially more severe geologic
or geotechnical impacts when compared to the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR.
GEO-5: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Geologic Hazards—Offsite Water Tank Site
The 2006 EIR concluded construction on the water tank site and installation of the potable water line
could result in potential off-site geologic hazards. Development of the proposed Bristol project would
result in no changes to the water tank site. No new impacts ora substantial increase in the severity of the
prior geologic hazards due to the water tank construction would be expected to occur with
implementation of the proposed project.
GEO-6: Construction -Related Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area would result in less than significant erosion
and sedimentation -related impacts with implementation of City requirements, including preparation and
implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). All improvements associated with
the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR and
would be required to comply with City requirements, including preparation of a SWPPP and
implementation of specific best management practices (BMPs) to control runoff, accelerated erosion, and
sedimentation during construction. The proposed project would not include any operational activities that
would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new or
substantially more severe geologic or geotechnical impacts when compared to the impacts analyzed in
the 2006 EIR.
GEO-7: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Ground Settlement—University District Specific Plan
Area
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP could potentially be impacted by ground
settlement and included Mitigation Measure GEO-7a, requiring the processing of native soils prior to
construction, to ensure impacts remain less than significant. The Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
report prepared for the proposed Bristol project site (ENGEO 2017) indicates that liquefaction -induced
ground settlement should be further evaluated during potential future design -level studies. Final
recommendations regarding site grading and foundation construction at the project site would be
provided after additional site-specific exploration has been undertaken. Compliance with Mitigation
17
Measure GEO-7a would further reduce potential impacts associated with ground settlement to a less than
significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-7a and site-specific geotechnical
recommendations, the project would not result in any new or substantially more severe geologic or
geotechnical impacts when compared to the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-7a: Process Native Topsoil Prior to Construction
GEO-8: Substantial Adverse Effects Resulting from Expansive Soils—University District Specific Plan Area
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area could be impacted by expansive soils. The
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation report prepared for the Bristol project site also concluded that
expansive soils could affect site development and recommended foundation subgrade treatment during
construction. This recommendation is consistent with 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure GEO-8a, which
requires foundation design to account for expansive soil conditions. With implementation of Mitigation
Measure GEO-8a impacts associated with expansive soils would be reduced to a less than significant level
and this impact would be consistent with the 2006 EIR.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-8a. Design Foundations to Account for Expansive Soil Conditions
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZ-1: Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or the Environment through the Routine Transport, Use,
or Disposal of Hazardous Materials
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area would result in less than significant
impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. All improvements
associated with the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint evaluated in
the 2006 EIR. The proposed project does not include any operational activities that would create new
environmental impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new or substantially more
severe hazardous materials when compared to the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR.
HAZ-2: Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or the Environment through Reasonably Foreseeable
Upset and Accident Conditions Involving the Release of Hazardous Materials into the Environment
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area could result in potentially significant
impacts related to the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project does not include any operational
activities that would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that would result
in any new or substantially more severe hazardous materials when compared to the impacts analyzed in
the 2006 EIR. All improvements associated with the proposed project would occur within the same
development footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. To ensure potential impacts from hazardous materials
remain less than significant, the project would implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-2a to HAZ-2e and AQ -
1. Mitigation Measures HAZ-2a to HAZ-2e include requirements pertaining to the proper storage and
handling of hazardous materials, methods for handling spills, preparation and implementation of
hazardous materials management plans, soil sampling, and procedures for the handling of soils generated
by construction activities. Implementation of these measures, in conjunction with Mitigation Measure
AQ -1 (refer to Impact AIR -1), the project would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts
related to the release of hazardous materials.
18
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
HAZ-2a: Follow City of Rohnert Park Fire Department and Other Guidelines for Storage and
Handling of Hazardous Materials
HAZ-2b: Immediately Contain Spills, Excavate Spill -Contaminated Soil, and Dispose of It at an
Approved Facility
HAZ-2c: Develop and Implement Plans to Reduce Exposure of People and the Environment to
Hazardous Conditions during Construction Activities
HAZ-2d: Screen Surface Soils in the Project Area for Residuals from Agricultural Chemicals
(Fertilizers and Pesticides)
HAZ-2e: Stockpile and Sample Excavated Soils
HAZ-3: Emit Hazardous Emissions or Handle Hazardous or Acutely Hazardous Materials, Substances, or
Waste within 0.25 Mile of an Existing or Proposed School
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area could result in a potentially significant
impact related to hazardous emissions. The proposed project does not include any operational activities
that would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new
or substantially more severe hazardous materials when compared to the impacts analyzed in the 2006
EIR. All improvements associated with the proposed project would occur within the same development
footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. Consistent with the 2006 EIR, the project would be required to
implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-2a to HAZ-2e (refer to Impact HAZ-2) which would reduce any
potential impacts associated with hazardous materials, substances, and waste to a less than significant
level.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
HAZ-2a: Follow City of Rohnert Park Fire Department and Other Guidelines for Storage and
Handling of Hazardous Materials
HAZ-2b: Immediately Contain Spills, Excavate Spill -Contaminated Soil, and Dispose of It at an
Approved Facility
HAZ-2c: Develop and Implement Plans to Reduce Exposure of People and the Environment to
Hazardous Conditions during Construction Activities
HAZ-2d: Screen Surface Soils in the Project Area for Residuals from Agricultural Chemicals
(Fertilizers and Pesticides)
HAZ-2e: Stockpile and Sample Excavated Soils
HAZ-4: Located on a Site Included on a List of Hazardous Materials Sites Compiled Pursuant to California
Government Code Section 65962.5
The 2006 EIR indicated that implementation of the UDSP would result in less than significant impacts
related to development being located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5. The 2006 EIR concluded that there are no
Federal National Priority List sites within the project area and indicated that remediation was completed
on the one identified leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site within 0.5 miles of the UDSP site. The
proposed project does not include any operational activities that would create new environmental
19
impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new or substantially more severe
hazardous materials when compared to the impacts analyzed in the EIR because all improvements would
occur within the same development footprint evaluated in the EIR. No hazardous materials sites have
been identified within the UDSP area since preparation of the 2006 EIR.
HAZ-5: Impair Implementation of, or Physically Interfere with an Adopted Emergency Response Plan or
Emergency Evacuation Plan
The 2006 EIR indicated that implementation of the UDSP would result in less than significant emergency
response related impacts. The proposed project does not include any operational activities that would
create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that would result in any new or
substantially more severe impacts when compared to the impacts analyzed in the 2006 EIR. All
improvements associated with the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint
evaluated in the 2006 EIR. The traffic analysis reports prepared for the 2014 Project, which assumed
development of the project, confirmed that there would be no new significant emergency access impacts.
The 2006 EIR indicated that implementation of the UDSP would result in less than significant emergency
response related impacts. All improvements associated with the proposed project would occur within the
same development footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. The traffic analysis prepared for the 2014 Project,
which assumed development of low density residential land uses at the project site, confirmed that no
new significant emergency access impacts would result under the revised Specific Plan. Thus, the
proposed project would not result in new or more significant emergency response related impacts in
comparison to the 2006 EIR.
HAZ-6: Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk of Loss, Injury or Death Involving Wildland Fires
The 2006 EIR indicated that it the project could result in potentially significant impacts related to exposure
of people or structures to risks associated with wildland fires. The proposed project does not include any
operational activities that would create new environmental impacts or new construction methods that
would result in any new or substantially more severe hazards when compared to the impacts analyzed in
the 2006 EIR. All improvements associated with the proposed would occur within the same development
footprint evaluated in the 2006 EIR. Implementation of EIR Mitigation Measures HAZ-6a, which requires
removal of dry vegetation prior to construction, and Mitigation Measure HAZ-6b, which requires spark -
generating construction equipment to be equipped with spark arresters, would reduce this impact to a
less than significant level.
L� plicable 2006 UR Mit! ati_g on Measures
HAZ-6a: Before Construction Begins, Clear Materials That Could Serve as Fire Fuel from Areas
Slated for Construction Activities
HAZ-6b: Require that Spark -Generating Construction Equipment be Equipped with
Manufacturers' Recommended Spark Arresters
NOISE
N-1. Exposure of Existing Residential Uses and Future Residential Uses on the Project Site from Grading
and Building Construction Activities
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP area would expose existing and future residents
to construction -related noise impacts. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same
development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. The Noise Assessment Study prepared for the 2014
20
Addendum concluded that noise levels resulting from the proposed 2014 Project, which assumes
development of the proposed project, would be less than that modeled in the 2006 EIR. Mitigation N1 -a,
1-b and 1-c, which restrict hours of construction activity, require the notification of nearby residences and
designation of a noise disturbance coordinator, and require construction equipment to be located away
from residences, would be required to be implemented to ensure potential noise -related impacts remain
less than significant. Accordingly, no new significant construction -related noise impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of any prior construction noise impacts would be expected to occur as a result of
the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
N -1a: Restrict Hours of Construction Activity
N -1b: Disseminate Essential Information to Residences and Implement a Complaint/Response
Tracking Program
N -1c: Locate Construction Equipment as Far Away from Residences as Feasible
N-2: Exposure of Existing Residential Uses and Future Residential Uses on the Project Site from
Construction -Period Groundborne Vibration
The 2006 EIR indicated that development within the UDSP would expose existing and future residents to
groundborne construction -related vibration impacts. This impact was previously found to be less than
significant and the proposed project would be consistent with the assumed land uses and structure types
for the site. Accordingly, no new significant construction -related noise impacts or a substantial increase
in the severity of any prior noise impacts would be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
N-3. Exposure of Offsite, Noise -Sensitive Land Uses to Increased Traffic Noise
The 2006 EIR found that implementation of the UDSP would result in increased traffic -generated noise
levels, but the increases were less than significant. The noise study prepared for the 2014 Project
concluded that, based on the updated traffic study, noise levels resulting from the 2014 Project would be
less than modeled in the 2006 EIR. The proposed project would be in the same development area with
the same level of development as assessed in the 2014 Addendum. Accordingly, no new significant traffic -
generated noise impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior noise impacts would be
expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
N-4 Exposure of New Noise -Sensitive Land Uses to Noise
The 2006 EIR found that implementation of the UDSP would result in a significant impact related to
exposure of new noise -sensitive land uses to noise. The noise study prepared for the 2014 Addendum
concluded that traffic noise would not increase as a result of the revisions to the Specific Plan. The
proposed project would be within the same development area and include the same level of development
as assessed in the 2014 Addendum.
In compliance with 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure N -4a, which stipulates that noise levels at outdoor
residential areas within the UDSP shall not exceed 60 decibels (dB) day -night level (Ldn), the project
prepared a Noise Assessment Study (Edward L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018) to evaluate expected noise
levels at residential outdoor activity areas. The assessment concluded that the exterior noise exposures
would be within the limits of the City of Rohnert Park Noise Element standards of 60 dB DNL at single-
family exterior living areas and no additional noise mitigation measures would be required for the project.
Specifically, existing noise exposure at the most impacted rear and side yards along Keiser Avenue, 36 ft.
21
from the centerline of the road, is 55 dB DNL (Edward L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018). Under future traffic
conditions, which assumes a 6 dB increase in traffic noise levels due to increased traffic volumes at
buildout of the UDSP and a 1 dB decrease in traffic noise levels due to the planned resurfacing of Keiser
Avenue, the report concluded that noise exposure would be expected to increase to 60 dB DNL. As noted
in the Noise Assessment, the future speed limit for Keiser Avenue is expected to increase from 30 mile
per hour (mph) to 35 mph. This increase would have a negligible increase in the traffic noise levels (Edward
L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018).
The assessment determined that existing exterior noise exposure at the most impacted planned building
setback from Keiser Avenue, 50 ft. from the centerline of the road, is 52 dB DNL. Under future traffic
conditions, the noise exposure is expected to increase to 57 dB DNL. The future 60 dB DNL noise contour
will be 36 ft. from the centerline of Keiser Avenue. The existing noise exposures at the most impacted rear
and side yards and building setbacks contiguous with Lawrence E. Jones Middle School playgrounds and
playfields range from 47 to 51 dB DNL. Under future conditions, the noise exposures are expected to
remain at 47 to 51 dB DNL (Edward L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018). Thus, the noise exposures are within
the limits of the City of Rohnert Park Noise Element standards.
Consistent with 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure N -4b, which requires interior noise at residences to comply
with the City's interior noise goal of 45 dB Ldn, the project -specific Noise Assessment Study provided an
evaluation of expected interior noise exposures. The assessment concluded that noise exposures would
be within the 45 dB DNL limit of the City of Rohnert Park Noise Element standards and noise mitigation
measures for the interior living spaces would not be required (Edward L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018).
Specifically, the report determined that interior noise exposures in the most impacted living spaces closest
to Keiser Avenue would be up to 37 and 45 dB DNL under existing and future traffic conditions,
respectively. The interior noise exposures in the most impacted living spaces closest to the Lawrence E.
Jones Middle School playgrounds and playfields would be up to 31 to 35 dB DNL under existing and future
conditions (Edward L. Pack Associates Inc. 2018).
Accordingly, no new significant noise impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior noise
impacts identified in the 2006 EIR would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed
project.
AK)glicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure N -4a: Ensure that Noise Levels at Residential Outdoor Activity Areas Do Not
Exceed 60 dB Ld n
Mitigation Measure N -4b: Apply Acoustical Insulation Treatments to Residential Units
N-5: Exposure of Existing Offsite Noise -Sensitive Land Uses to Cumulative Traffic Noise
The 2006 EIR found that implementation of the UDSP would result in increased significant noise impacts
to off-site noise -sensitive land uses. The noise study prepared for the 2014 Addendum, which assumed
development of the project, concluded that traffic noise would not increase as a result of the changes to
the Specific Plan. No new significant noise impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior
noise impacts would be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
POP -1: Directly Induce Substantial Population Growth
22
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the increase in population growth and concluded
that the 2006 Project would not contribute to substantial population growth. The 2006 EIR determined
that, with implementation of the phasing described in the Specific Plan, this impact would be less than
significant. The 2014 Addendum found that the 2014 Project would reduce both housing and employment
associated with the Specific Plan and corresponding population generation. The proposed project would
occur within the same development footprint and would include development at the site consistent with
assumptions in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum. No new significant impacts related to population
growth or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior population -related impacts would be expected
to occur as a result of the proposed project.
POP -2: Indirectly Induce Substantial Population Growth
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the increase in population growth. No new
significant impacts related to population growth or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior
population -related impacts would be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
POP -3: Displace Substantial Numbers of Existing Housing
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing
housing and concluded that the impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed
project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Accordingly, no
new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts related to
displacement of housing would be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
POP -4: Displace Substantial Numbers of People
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the displacement of substantial numbers of people
and concluded that the impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed project
would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Accordingly, no new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts related to displacement
of people would be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
POP -5: Increase Availability of Housing
The 2006 EIR evaluated the beneficial impact related to the UDSP increasing the availability of housing.
Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in
the 2006 EIR and would include development of a portion of the low density residential units planned for
in the UDSP. Consistent with the conclusion reached in the 2006 EIR, the proposed project would have a
beneficial impact on housing.
PUBLIC SERVICES
PS -1: Increased Need for Police and Fire Facilities and Service
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the increase in population growth triggering a
corresponding demand for police and fire services. Development of the proposed project would occur
within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Because the proposed project would
be consistent with the assumptions included in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, it would not be
expected to generate higher levels of demand for public services. No new significant impacts related to
police or fire facilities or services or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior police and fire
services impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
23
PS -2: Increased School Enrollment Associated with Buildout of University District Specific Plan
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the anticipated increase in student enrollment
resulting from buildout of the UDSP and concluded that associated impacts would be significant. To
reduce impacts to a less than significant level, the 2006 EIR included Mitigation Measure PS -2a to require
payment of school fees by the developer. Development of the proposed project would occur within the
same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Because the proposed project would be
consistent with development assumptions included in the 2006 EIR and the 2014 Addendum, no new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior school -related impacts would be
expected to occur with project implementation.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure PS -2a: Payment of School Fees by Developer
PS -3: Increased Demand for Recreational Facilities Resulting in Substantial Adverse Environmental
Impacts or Result in Substantially Accelerated Physical Deterioration
The 2006 EIR evaluated environmental impacts due to the demand for parks and recreational services
resulting from buildout of the UDSP and concluded that the UDSP would provide sufficient recreational
facilities such that no impacts would occur on existing facilities. The proposed project would occur within
the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and the project would include development
consistent with the assumptions included in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum.
To satisfy the City's park dedication requirement of 5 acres per 1,000 residents, the project proposes to
pay an in -lieu fee as provided in Section 16.14.020 of the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code.
With payment of the in -lieu park fee, as proposed, the project would result in no new significant parks or
recreation -related impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts identified in the
2006 EIR.
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
2007 plus Early Project Phase
TRA -1: Increased Congestion at Sonoma State University Access upon Addition of Early Phase Project
Traffic
The 2006 EIR concluded that the UDSP would increase congestion at Sonoma State University (SSU) access
during the early phases of development in the Specific Plan area. Because development of the proposed
project site was not included as part of the early phase of development, there would be no change in this
impact or the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measure included in the 2006 EIR.
TRA -2: Impede Emergency Access in Early Phase
The 2006 EIR stated that "the University District Specific Plan would include an interconnected street
network that would facilitate emergency access; it does not appear to include any design features that
would adversely affect the maneuverability of emergency vehicles." Because development of the
proposed project site was not included as part of the early phase of development, there would be no
change in this impact.
TRA -3: Disruption of Alternative Transportation Modes
24
The 2006 EIR concluded that the early phases of development in the UDSP area would have a less than
significant impact related to disruption of alternative transportation modes. The 2006 EIR concluded that
development within the UDSP would not affect alternative transportation modes. The proposed project
would not change the conclusion reached in the 2006 EIR for this impact.
2012 Plus Project Buildout
TRA -4: Unacceptable Level of Service at Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the entire UDSP could have a potentially significant impact on
traffic levels of services at the Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue intersection. The traffic study prepared for the
changes proposed by the 2014 Project concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of
the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the 2014 Project.
With the addition of a new traffic signal, as described in Mitigation Measures TRA -4a and 4b, the 2006 EIR
concluded that traffic conditions would be improved and impacts reduced to a less than significant level.
As indicated in the 2006 EIR, these improvements are projected to be needed once development in the
UDSP and Northeast Specific Plan areas adds traffic to Keiser Avenue. The EIR further notes that the City
would determine project proponent's fair share of the cost of these improvements.
For the proposed project, a Signal Warrant Analysis for the Keiser Avenue intersection at Snyder Lane
(T1KM 2017) was prepared. The analysis concluded that a signal would not be warranted at the
intersection during the AM or PM peak hours as a result of the added vehicle trips associated with the
proposed project. However, the City would require the project to contribute its fair share of costs for the
improvements associated with Mitigation Measures TRA -4a and 4b.
No new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would
be expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Miti¢ation Measures
TRA -4a: Install Traffic Signal at Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue Intersection
TRA -4b: Widen Keiser Avenue Westbound Approach and Snyder Lane
TRA -5: Unacceptable Level of Service at Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP could have a potentially significant impact on traffic
levels of service at the Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue intersection. The traffic study prepared for the
changes proposed by the 2014 Project concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of
the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the 2014 Project.
The updated study further concluded that changes proposed by the 2014 Project would result in lower
projected traffic levels from Level of Service (LOS) F to LOS C at this intersection, reducing the severity of
this impact to less than significant, thereby eliminating the need for the applicable mitigation measures
included in the 2006 EIR. Because the proposed project would be consistent with the planned uses for
the site in the Specific Plan and as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, there would be no
change to this impact conclusion.
TRA -6: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP could result in a potentially significant impact related
to levels of service at the Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane intersection. The traffic study prepared
for the 2014 Project concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed
mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the 2014 Project. The updated
25
traffic study further concluded that changes in the 2014 Project would result in lower projected traffic
levels, from LOS F to LOS E, at this intersection, reducing the severity of the impact but not to a level below
the significance threshold. Because the proposed project would be consistent with the planned uses for
the site in the Specific Plan and as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, there would be no
change to this impact conclusion. No new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity
of any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -6a: Widen Snyder Lane between Keiser Avenue and Southwest Boulevard.
TRA -6b: Reconfigure Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane Intersection
TRA -7: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University Access
Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP could result in a potentially significant impact related
to levels of service at the Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University access intersection. The
traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness
of the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the 2014 Project.
The proposed project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the site as assessed in the 2006 EIR
and 2014 Addendum. Accordingly, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -7a: Install Traffic Signal or Roundabout at Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University
Access Intersection
TRA -8: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP could have a potentially significant impact on levels of
services at the Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road intersection. The traffic study prepared for
the 2014 Project concluded that changes to the Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels
from LOS D to LOS C at this intersection, reducing the severity of this impact to less than significant,
thereby eliminating the need for the applicable mitigation measures included in the 2006 EIR. Because
the proposed project would be consistent with the planned uses for the site in the Specific Plan and as
assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, there would be no change to this impact conclusion.
TRA -9: Increased Congestion at Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road in Penngrove
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would result in a significant and unavoidable impact
related to increased congestion at the Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road intersection in Penngrove. The
traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness
of the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the 2014 Project.
Because the proposed project would be consistent with the planned uses for the site in the 2014
Addendum, there would be no change to this impact conclusion. No new significant traffic impacts or a
substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the proposed
project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
26
TRA -9a: City of Rohnert Park Coordination with Sonoma County Transportation Authority and
Sonoma County
TRA -10: Impede Emergency Access at 2012 Buildout
The 2006 EIR stated that "the University District Specific Plan would include an interconnected street
network that would facilitate emergency access; it does not appear to include any design features that
would adversely affect the maneuverability of emergency vehicles." The 2014 Addendum concluded that
changes to the Specific Plan associated with the 2014 Project, which assumed development of the
proposed project, would not change the 2006 EIR conclusion. The site plan for the proposed project would
also not change this conclusion. Emergency access to the project site would be available from two
locations at Keiser Avenue. No new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of
any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project.
TRA -11: Provision of Access Control on Rohnert Park Expressway at 2012 Scenario
The 2006 EIR evaluated the potential impact to the provision of access control on Rohnert Park
Expressway and concluded that approval of access plans, as described in Mitigation Measure TRA -11a,
would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. It was determined that the 2014 Project's changes
to the Specific Plan would not change the 2006 EIR conclusion. As noted in the 2014 Addendum, as a part
of the revised Specific Plan, a signal would be installed at Rohnert Park Expressway / Twin Creeks Road
and added eastbound and westbound through lanes, as well as a one-way stop, at Rohnert Park
Expressway / Kohlson Place. The 2014 traffic study concluded that, with the proposed improvements,
these intersections would operate at LOS C or better and 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure TRA -11a would no
longer be required. Because the proposed project would be consistent with the planned uses for the site
in the Specific Plan and as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, the project would not change
this impact conclusion.
TRA -12: Disruption of Alternative Transportation Modes at 2012 Buildout
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a less than significant impact related to
disruption of alternative transportation modes. The traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project concluded
that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels at this intersection,
reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum concluded that
this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR,
would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Because the proposed
project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan, as assessed in
the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the
severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project.
2020 Plus Project Buildout
TRA -13: Unacceptable Level of Service at Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would result in unacceptable levels of service at the
Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue intersection under 2020 conditions. The traffic study prepared for the 2014
Project concluded that with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -4a, service levels would be
improved and this impact would be reduces to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum concluded
that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in the 2006 EIR,
would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Improvements to Keiser
Avenue and intersections at Keiser Avenue and Snyder Lane and Petaluma Hill Road will be constructed
27
concurrent with project implementation. Because the proposed project would be consistent with the
assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum,
no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would
occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -4a: Install Traffic Signal at Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue Intersection
TRA -4b: Widen Keiser Avenue Approach and Snyder Lane
TRA -14: Unacceptable Level of Service at Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue intersection. The traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project
concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels at this
intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum
concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in
the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project.
Improvements to Keiser Avenue and intersections at Keiser Avenue and Snyder Lane and Petaluma Hill
Road will be constructed concurrent with project implementation. Because the proposed project would
be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR
and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any
prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -14a: Signalize Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue Intersection
TRA -15: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane intersection. The traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project
concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels at this
intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum
concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in
the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Because
the proposed project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan,
as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed
project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -6a: Widen Snyder Lane between Keiser Avenue and Southwest Boulevard.
TRA -6b: Reconfigure Rohnert Park Expressway/Snyder Lane Intersection
TRA -16: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University Access
Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University access intersection. The traffic study prepared for
28
the 2014 Project concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic
levels at this intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014
Addendum concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation
measures in the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014
Project. Because the proposed project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in
the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a
substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the
proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -7a: Install Traffic Signal or Roundabout at Rohnert Park Expressway/Sonoma State University
Access Intersection
TRA -17: Unacceptable Level of Service at Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road intersection. The traffic study prepared for the 2014
Project concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels
at this intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum
concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in
the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Because
the proposed project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan,
as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed
project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -8a: Add Southbound Right Turn Lane and Separate Eastbound Left and Right Turn Lanes at
Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road Intersection
TRA -18: Increased Congestion at East Cotati Avenue/Old Redwood Highway Intersection
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the East Cotati Avenue/Old Redwood Highway intersection. The traffic study prepared for the 2014
Project concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels
at this intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum
concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in
the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Because
the proposed project would be consistent with the assumed uses for the project site in the Specific Plan,
as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed
project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -18a: City of Rohnert Park Coordination with City of Cotati
TRA -19: Increased Congestion at Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road and Main Street/Old Redwood
Highway Intersections in Penngrove
29
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a significant impact on levels of service at
the Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road intersection in Penngrove. The traffic study prepared for the 2014
Project concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan would result in lower projected traffic levels
at this intersection, reducing the severity of the impact to a less than significant level. The 2014 Addendum
concluded that this impact, and the need for and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures in
the 2006 EIR, would not be changed as a result of the changes associated with the 2014 Project. Because
the proposed project would be consistent with the Specific Plan's assumed uses for the project site, as
assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase
in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the
proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
TRA -9a: City of Rohnert Park Coordination with Sonoma County Transportation Authority and
Sonoma County
TRA -20: Impede Emergency Access at 2020 Buildout
The 2006 EIR stated that "the University District Specific Plan would include an interconnected street
network that would facilitate emergency access; it does not appear to include any design features that
would adversely affect the maneuverability of emergency vehicles." The 2014 Addendum concluded that
changes to the Specific Plan associated with the 2014 Project, which assumed development of the
proposed project, would not change the 2006 EIR conclusion. The site plan forthe proposed project would
not change this conclusion. Emergency access to the site would be available from Keiser Avenue. No new
significant traffic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur
as a result of the proposed project.
TRA -21: Disruption of Alternative Transportation Modes at 2020 Buildout
The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of the UDSP would have a less than significant impact related to
disruption of alternative transportation modes at 2020 buildout. The 2006 EIR concluded that buildout of
the UDSP would not affect alternative transportation modes. The proposed project would not affect the
provision of bus service or bike transportation in the UDSP. Accordingly, no new significant traffic impacts
or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the project.
The project would not change the conclusion of the 2006 EIR regarding this impact.
TRA -22: Unacceptable Level of Service on U.S. 101
The traffic study prepared for the 2014 Project concluded that buildout of the revised Specific Plan, which
assumes development of low density residential uses at the project site, would result in significant impacts
to U.S. 101, similar to those impacts presented in the 2006 EIR. The site plan for the proposed project
would not result in changes to the conclusion of the 2006 EIR for this impact. No new significant traffic
impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior traffic impacts would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
UT -1: Temporary Increase in Solid Waste Generation
The 2006 EIR evaluated the temporary solid waste generation due to construction activities within the
UDSP and concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed project
would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. Because the proposed
�X
project would not require higher levels of construction activity than assumed in the 2016 EIR, construction
of the proposed project would not be expected generate higher levels of solid waste. No new significant
solid waste -related impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts would be
expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
UT -2: Increase in Solid Waste Generation Associated with University District Specific Plan
Implementation
The 2006 EIR evaluated increases in population growth and solid waste generation associated with
buildout of the UDSP and concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Because buildout of the
UDSP was contemplated in the City's General Plan, solid waste generated from buildout of the UDSP falls
within the projected waste stream for which the County has made provision. The 2014 Project resulted in
slightly reduced levels of residential units as assumed in the 2006 EIR and reduced the size of the
mixed/use commercial center. Because the revised Specific Plan would generate lower levels of
development overall, including fewer residential units, the 2014 Addendum concluded that buildout
under the Plan would not generate higher amounts of solid waste in comparison to the 2006 Specific Plan.
Because the proposed project would include development consistent with assumptions included in the
Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant solid waste -related
impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts would be expected to occur.
UT -3: Increased Demand for Energy Associated with University District Specific Plan Implementation
The 2006 EIR evaluated energy demand associated with the UDSP development and concluded that
impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same
development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. The 2014 Project resulted in slightly reduced levels of
residential units as assumed in the 2006 EIR and reduced the size of the mixed/use commercial center.
Because the revised Specific Plan would generate lower levels of development overall, including fewer
residential units, the 2014 Addendum concluded that buildout under the Plan would not generate higher
demand for energy in comparison to the 2006 Specific Plan. Because the proposed project would include
development consistent with assumptions included in the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and
2014 Addendum, no new significant energy-related impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any
prior impacts would be expected to occur.
UT -4: Increased Demand for Communications Associated with University District Specific Plan
Implementation
The 2006 EIR evaluated the increased demand for communications due to development within the UDSP
and concluded that associated impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed
project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. The 2014 Project
resulted in slightly reduced levels of residential units as assessed in the 2006 EIR and reduced the size of
the mixed/use commercial center. Because the revised Specific Plan would generate lower levels of
development overall, including fewer residential units, the 2014 Addendum concluded that buildout
under the Plan would not generate higher demand for communications in comparison to the 2006 Specific
Plan. Because the proposed project would include development consistent with assumptions included in
the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and 2014 Addendum, no new significant communications -
related impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any prior impacts would be expected to occur.
UT -5: Increased Wastewater Generation Associated with University District Specific Plan
Implementation
31
The 2006 EIR evaluated increased wastewater generation due to population growth from the UDSP and
concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Development of the proposed project would occur
within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and would develop a portion of the
low density residential units assumed in the 2006 Specific Plan. The 2014 Project resulted in slightly
reduced levels of residential units, as assessed in the 2006 EIR, and reduced the size of the mixed/use
commercial center. Because the revised Specific Plan would generate lower levels of development overall,
including fewer residential units, the 2014 Addendum concluded that buildout would not generate higher
levels of wastewater in comparison to the 2006 Specific Plan. Because the proposed project would include
development consistent with assumptions included in the Specific Plan, as assessed in the 2006 EIR and
2014 Addendum, no new significant wastewater impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any
prior impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
WATER RESOURCES
WR -1: Change in Drainage Patterns
The 2006 EIR concluded that development of the UDSP would increase runoff, potentially causing flooding
on site. As identified in the Specific Plan, each property "will be required to address all of its drainage
systems in order to reduce the impacts of development runoff upon the City and regional drainage
system." The 2006 EIR included Mitigation Measure WR -1a requiring development projects within the
UDSP to implement recommendations of storm water quality management plans and storm drainage
detention analysis. The Bristol project includes Low Impact Development (LID) measures, including
features to capture and infiltrate small storm event volumes onsite. The project's proposed stormwater
management efforts include the incorporation of LID measures into the project design including onsite
capture of surface runoff, detention, infiltration, and bioretention. The primary water quality measure to
be implemented is the construction of a stormwater treatment basin in the northwest portion of the
project site through which all of the storm drain runoff from the project would be directed. In compliance
with the 2006 EIR, drainage impacts associated with development on the Bristol project site would remain
less than significant with inclusion of Mitigation Measure WR -1a and implementation of recommended
measures from a site-specific storm water quality management plan and storm drainage detention
analysis. Accordingly, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior hydrologic
impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure WR -1a: Implement Recommendations of Storm Water Quality Management
Plan and Storm Drainage Detention Analysis
WR -2: Water Quality Impacts from Increased Runoff
As discussed in Impact WR -1 above, development within the UDSP would result in an increase of
impervious surfaces and an increase in stormwater and non-stormwater runoff. The 2006 EIR concluded
that implementation of Mitigation Measure WR -1a, as discussed in Impact WR -1, would reduce the
potential impact significance. Implementation of Mitigation Measure WR -2a, which requires regular
street sweeping on project roadways and other paved areas, and Mitigation Measure WR -2b requiring
implementation of BMPs to maximize water quality, would serve to further reduce potential impacts to a
less than significant level. The proposed Bristol project would be required to comply with these measures,
as well, to ensure that water quality impacts from increased runoff remain less than significant. With
implementation of Mitigation Measure WR -1a, WR -2a, and WR -2b, the Bristol project would be consistent
32
with the 2006 EIR and would result in no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior
hydrologic impacts.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
WR -1a: Implement Recommendations of Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Storm
Drainage Detention Analysis
WR -2a: Street Sweeping
WR -2b: Best Management Practices to Maximize Storm Water Quality
WR -3: Construction -Related Water Quality Effects
The 2006 EIR concluded that construction activities associated with development of the UDSP would
introduce the potential for increased erosion and sedimentation, which could have subsequent negative
effects on water quality and storm drainage capacity. Mitigation Measure WR -2b, which requires
implementation of BMPs to maximize water quality, would reduce this potentially significant impact to a
less than significant level. As discussed under Impact WR -2 above, the proposed Bristol project would
also be required to implement the 2006 EIR Mitigation Measure WR -2b to reduce potential construction -
related water quality effects to a less than significant level. With implementation of this measures, no
new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior hydrologic impacts would be expected
to occur with the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
WR -2b: Best Management Practices to Maximize Storm Water Quality
WR -4: Potential Contamination from Construction Vehicles and Equipment Spills
Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in
the 2006 EIR. To address potential construction -related impacts to groundwater and surface water
quality, the proposed project would be required to implement 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures WR -4a and
WR -4b. Mitigation Measure WR -4a requires development projects within the UDSP to prepare and
implement a spill prevention and control program to minimize the potential for, and effects from, spills
of hazardous, toxic, or petroleum substances during construction activities. Mitigation Measure WR -4b
requires development projects to implement measures to maintain groundwater quality in the event of
an appreciable spill. With implementation of the applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures, no new
impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior water quality impacts identified in the 2006
EIR would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
Applicable 2006 EIR Mitigation Measures
WR -4a: Implement a Spill Prevention and Control Program
WR -4b: Implement Measures to Maintain Groundwater or Surface Water Quality
WR -S: Flood Hazard
According to the 2006 EIR, portions of the UDSP are within a 100 -year floodplain. As shown on 2006 EIR
Figure 3.13-1, the proposed Bristol project site is not within a designated 100-yearflood zone. Accordingly,
2006 EIR Mitigation Measure WR -5a, which requires structures to be constructed outside the 100 -year
floodplain, would not be applicable to the proposed project. No new impacts or a substantial increase in
33
the severity of the prior hydrologic impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the
proposed project.
WR -6: Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow Hazards
The 2006 EIR concluded that the UDSP area was not subject to tsunami hazard to the distance from the
ocean, and unlikely to be subject to seiche hazard due to the distance to any large water bodies. Since
development of the proposed project would occur within the same development footprint as assessed in
the 2006 EIR, no new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of seiche or tsunami would be
expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
WR -7: Groundwater Quantity
The 2006 EIR concluded that groundwater supply, together with the other water supplies available to the
City, would be sufficient to meet the demands of the UDSP. Development of the proposed project would
occur within the same development footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and additional groundwater
impacts are not anticipated to occur. No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior
groundwater impacts would be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
WR -8: Insufficient Surface Water Quantity
The 2006 EIR contained the UDSP Water Supply Analysis based on the City's 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development
footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. For the 2014 Project, the City evaluated the proposed changes to
the Specific Plan, which assumed development of low density residential at the project site, against the
Water Supply Assessment and concluded that sufficient water supply is available for buildout of the
revised Specific Plan. Under the proposed project, the site population at buildout would be consistent
with the assumptions included in the 2014 Addendum. Sources of water are not proposed to be changed.
No new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior water supply -related impacts would
be expected to occur with implementation of the proposed project.
WR -9: Use of Recycled Water
The 2006 EIR contained the UDSP Water Supply Analysis based on the City's 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan. Development of the proposed project would occur within the same development
footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR. As concluded in the 2014 Addendum, buildout under the revised
Specific Plan would result in a population that would be the same or lower than the 2006 Project. For the
2014 Project, the City evaluated the proposed changes to the Specific Plan, which assumed development
of low density residential at the project site, against the Water Supply Assessment and concluded that
sufficient water supply is available for buildout of the revised Specific Plan. Sources of water are not
proposed to be changed as a result of the proposed project. No new impacts or a substantial increase in
the severity of the prior water supply -related impacts would occur.
GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
The 2006 EIR evaluated growth -inducing impacts associated with the Specific Plan. The EIR considered the
potential for the 2006 Project to indirectly or directly induce growth beyond that proposed in the Specific
Plan document. Because the UDSP would be constructed in phases, as outlined in the Specific Plan, and it
would comply with growth management goals in the City's General Plan, the EIR concluded that the 2006
Project would not contribute to substantial growth inducement beyond the Specific Plan area and impacts
associated with direct or indirect growth would be less than significant.
34
The 2006 EIR also assessed whether the UDSP would result in impacts associated with the removal of a
potential obstacle to growth. This impact was found to be less than significant since the UDSP was
identified and planned for development in the City's General Plan and planned infrastructure
improvements would not be oversized to serve additional growth beyond that described in the UDSP.
Finally, the 2006 EIR looked at whether the UDSP would tax community services or facilities to an extent
that new services or facilities would be necessary. Because improvements to new services and facilities
would be limited to the extension and installation of infrastructure with the capacity necessary to
accommodate the Plan area, and because the improvements are incorporated into the Specific Plan and
were part of the 2006 Project design, the 2006 EIR concluded that this impact would be less than
significant.
As discussed throughout this document, the proposed project would occur within the same development
footprint as assessed in the 2006 EIR and would include development of a portion of the low density
residences planned for in the UDSP area. Accordingly, the project would not be expected to result in new
or substantially more significant growth inducing impacts than identified in the 2006 EIR.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The 2006 EIR evaluated cumulative impacts associated with the Specific Plan. The cumulative analysis in
the 2006 EIR evaluated the cumulative effects on specific resources, including loss of open space, aesthetic
impacts, conversion of agricultural lands, air quality, biological resources, land use impacts, noise,
population -generated impacts to utilities and services, transportation and traffic, and water resources.
The cumulative impact analysis evaluated the combined impacts of past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects in conjunction with the 2006 Project. The EIR cumulative project list included specific
plans for the City, and development within the vicinity of the UDSP.
The 2006 EIR concluded that there could potentially be cumulative impacts from the development of the
2006 UDSP Project site when combined with foreseeable development projects through the year 2020.
The 2006 EIR included appropriate measures to reduce cumulative impacts, although significant
unavoidable impacts related to loss of open space, conversion of agricultural lands, air quality, biological
resources, land use, noise and traffic remained.
The 2014 Addendum prepared for the 2014 Project, which entailed revisions to the 2006 Specific Plan,
indicated that buildout under the revised Specific Plan would result in slightly reduced levels of
construction of residential units and a reduction in the size of the mixed use/commercial center in
comparison to the 2006 Project. In some cases, the 2014 Addendum concluded that the cumulative
impacts would decrease due to the reduction in the project size and the commensurate reduction in
population and associated trip generation. For example, cumulative air quality impacts would be less than
the 2006 Project due to the reduction in trip generation. For all cumulative impacts, it was determined
that the 2014 Project would not have any new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior
cumulative impacts.
As previously discussed, the proposed Bristol project would construct the single family residential
development anticipated for the site in the 2006 EIR. The project would occur within the same
development footprint as evaluated in the 2006 EIR. For all cumulative impacts, the proposed project
would not have any new impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the prior cumulative impacts.
35
III. Consistency Determination
As demonstrated in the analysis included in Section II of this document, the proposed Bristol project is
consistent with the UDSP analyzed in the 2006 UDSP EIR. Impacts associated with the project are
consistent with those previously identified and analyzed in the 2006 EIR and implementation of applicable
mitigation measures, as identified throughout this consistency analysis, would ensure that all project -
related impacts remain less than significant, consistent with the 2006 EIR. Impacts that were significant
and unavoidable in the 2006 EIR remain significant and unavoidable and were considered prior to
adoption of the UDSP. To ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of applicable EIR
mitigation measures, the project would be required to adhere to the MMRP for the 2006 EIR.
Conclusion:
• The proposed project is consistent with the anticipated land use established for the project site
in the UDSP
• The proposed project would not result in impacts on the environment that are peculiar to the
project or the project site that were not identified as impacts in the 2006 EIR;
• The proposed project would not result in potentially significant off-site or cumulative impacts that
were not identified in the 2006 EIR;
• The proposed project would not result in significant impacts, which, as a result of substantial new
information that was not known at the time the 2006 EIR was certified, would be more severe
than were already analyzed and disclosed in the 2006 EIR; and
• The project sponsor will undertake feasible mitigation measures specified in the 2006 EIR to
mitigate project -related significant impacts.
IV. References
Technical studies referenced in the consistency analysis and prepared specifically for the proposed project
include:
• Biological Assessment, Gee Property Residential Project, August 2017, prepared by Johnson
Marigot Consulting, LLC.
• Cultural Resource Evaluation of the Gee Property Project in the City of Rohnert Park, County of
Sonoma, December 2014, prepared by Archaeological Resource Management.
• Noise Assessment Study for the Planned 'Bristol" Single -Family Development, Gee Property, Keiser
Avenue, Rohnert Park, January 2018, prepared by Edward L. Pack Associates, Inc.
• Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration, April 2017, prepared by ENGEO Incorporated.
• Signal Warrant Analysis for 42 Dwelling Units Project, November 2017, prepared by TJKM.
• Subsurface Archaeological Testing Program for the Gee Property Project in the City of Rohnert
Park, County of Sonoma, October 2017, prepared by Archaeological Resource Management.
These documents, as well as the UDSP EIR and EIR Addendums, are available for review during normal
business hours at City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928.
36