Loading...
2016/04/28 Planning Commission Agenda PacketCity of Rohnert Park Planning Commission AGENDA -DEVISED Thursday, April 28, 2016 6:00 P.M. 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park To Any Member of the Audience Desiring, to Address the Plannin ['ommission: 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. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL (Adams Blanquie Borba Giudice Haydon___) 4. DECLARATION OF ABSENTION 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF POSTING OF AGENDA — Agenda has been posted in three public places: Community Center, Public Safety Building and City Hall. 6. 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. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - ADOPTION OF MINUTES 7.1 Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting(s) of February 11, 2016 8. AGENDA ITEMS 8.1 SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW — File No. PLSR2016-0001 — Lex Croffroth — Consideration of Resolution No. 2016-11, approving Site Plan and Architectural Review for the remodel of an existing Valero Self -Service gas station at 6301 Commerce Boulevard (143-051-009) CEQA: This proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15302 replacement of existing commercial structure with a new structure. 8.2 PUBLIC HEARING — PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN — File No. PROJ2014-0001 — North Bay Communities LLC, a subsidiary of SunCal — Consideration of Resolution No. 2016-15, conceptually approving, with recommended revisions, the Preliminary Development Plan for the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development located south of Rohnert Park Expressway, east of State Farm Drive, north of Enterprise Drive, and west of Seed Farm Drive/future SMART platform in Sonoma County, CA (APN143-051-072) CEQA: Environmental analysis is not required for preliminary review of a PDP. A full analysis of the PDP under CEQA will be conducted for a final development Plan. 8.3 PUBLIC HEARING — GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT & REZONE — File Nos. PLGP2016-0002 and PLZR2016-0002 — City of Rohnert Park — Consideration of Resolution(s) 2016-12, 2016-13, 2016-14, recommending approval to the City Council a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment and Rezone of property located at 435 Southwest Boulevard, Rohnert Park, CA (APN143-370-010) CEQA: A Negative Declaration was prepared for this proposal and circulated for a twenty (2) review period. There were no potentially significant impacts identified requiring mitigation. 9. SELECTION OF SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBER 10. ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11. ITEMS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE STAFF 12. 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 May 9, 2016 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 35.102.35.104 AD Title 111) CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA - I, Suzie Azevedo, Community Development Assistant for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing notice and agenda for the April 28, 2016, Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Rohnert Park was posted and available for review on April 22, 2016 and revised on April 25, 2016 at Rohnert Park City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. The agenda is available on the City of Rohnert Park's web site at wwww.rpeily.org. Signed this 25th day of April, 2016 at Rohnert Park, California. Suzie 4-zevedo, Recording Secretary City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Report DATE: April 28, 2016 ITEM NO: 8.1 SUBJECT: PLSR2016-0001 Site Plan and Architectural Review for Remodeling of the Existing Velaro Service Station LOCATION: 6301 Commerce Boulevard APN 143-051-009 REQUEST: Install new larger canopy, increase fuel dispensers install new refuse enclosure and improve building fagade. APPLICANT: Lex Croffroth — Architect representing property owners. Background This Valero station is located at the southwest corner of Commerce Boulevard and Rohnert Park Expressway. The station presently has two (2) fuel islands with four (4) gas pumps. The station dispenses both gasoline and diesel fuel. Applicant's Proposal The applicant proposes the following changes to the existing station: • Construct new fuel islands with a total of six (6) dispensers. • Construct a new canopy over the new fuel islands. The canopy will measure 55 by 60 feet. • Construct a new refuse enclosure at the southwest corner of the site. Tex -cote and paint the existing building. Page 1 • Add new signage. CanoDv and Fuel Islands: The two (2) existing fuel islands with four (4) gas pumps will be removed. Six (6) new gas pumps will be installed with three (3) in each row (Exhibit B). This will allow additional cars to fuel at one time including diesel fuel. A new canopy will be placed over the fuel pumps. The canopy will measure 55 by 60 feet and will maintain the existing setback from Commerce Boulevard. It will extend to approximately four (4) feet of the roof edge of the existing building (Exhibits E, H and I). Access to the fuel pumps and traffic circulation on the site will remain the same as the present situation. Building Details: There will be no change to the size or use of the existing building. It offers food items for sale and a cashier for motorists who pay in cash. An existing door and window on the south side of the building will be removed and replaced with a solid wall (Exhibit C). The existing building walls will be covered with a tex-cote that resembles stucco. New panels will also be installed on the roof fascia. The building walls and roof area will be painted a combination of earth tone colors (Exhibit D). The fascia of the canopy will have the standard Valero blue (teal) color. Refuse Enclosure: There is presently no refuse location on the site. A dumpster is located at the rear of the building in an unenclosed area. A new refuse enclosure will be located at the southwest corner of the property. It will measure 10 by 12 feet and will be constructed with six (6) foot high concrete block covered with stucco. The refuse enclosure will have a metal roof and solid metal gates (Exhibit B). It will be painted to match the color of the building. Signs: (Exhibits F to H) The north and south side of the canopy will have the name Valero and the Valero logo. They will consist of channel letters and will be internally illuminated. • There is an existing monument price sign on the Commerce Boulevard frontage of the site. It will be refaced with internally illuminated price signs. A new cabinet with the Valero name will be added to the top of the sign. The dimensions of the sign will be seven (7) feet tall and five (5) feet tall. An identical new internally illuminated monument sign will be installed on the Rohnert Park Expressway frontage of the site. • The only signage on the building is the name Food Shop over the entrance to the store facing commerce Boulevard. Fuel Pumps: Each fuel pump will have the Valero name and be painted the typical Valero colors (Exhibit H). They are designed to increase the flow of gas to reduce customer time at the pump. Underground Tanks: The existing underground fuel tanks comply with existing standards and will remain. However, new piping will have to be installed from the tanks to the new fuel dispensers. This will have to comply with existing EPA standards. Page 2 Li htiii LED area lights will be installed around the perimeter of the site. LED lighting will also be installed under the canopy. The photometric plan indicates that the site is very will illuminated. Landsca m : None of the improvements on the site will impact existing landscaping. Landscaping consists primarily of grass, shrubs and trees. There is a large row of redwood trees separating this property and the Panera Bread restaurant to the west. Stall AnaMis There have been no major changes to the station since it was originally constructed. Even though the proposed changes are relatively minor, they will result in a fairly extensive improvement in the appearance of the site from both Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Boulevard. The existing building is very dated. The tex-cote and new color scheme will substantially improve the appearance of the food store. The addition of two new fuel dispensers and replacement of the existing fuel dispensers will allow customers to fill their vehicles faster and increase the capacity of the site. The renovation does not include any improvements to existing landscaping. Staff recommends the installation of additional shrubbery and trees planted on the Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Boulevard frontages of the site. Staff is recommending that a landscape and irrigation plan be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The plan should include a minimum of two new trees on each street frontage. The station is accessed from Rohnert Park Expressway with a "right turn only" driveway and from two driveways on Commerce Boulevard. This site also has access from the adjacent shopping center with a single cross -access driveway. ' Environmental Determination This proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15302 replacement of existing commercial structure with a new structure. Findings The recommended findings to approve the Site Plan and Architectural Review for the replacement Valero station are included in the attached resolution. Public Notification Not required for Site Plan and Architectural Review. Page 3 Staff Recommendation Based on the analysis and findings of this report and the attached resolution, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 2016-11 approving the Site Plan and Architectural Review for the Valero station remodel, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: Resolution No 2016-11 Exhibit A Area Site Map Exhibit B Site Plan Modifications Trash Enclosure Exhibit C Building Modifications Exhibit D Building Colors Exhibit E New Canopy Details Exhibit F Sign Location Details Exhibit G Monument Sign Details Exhibit H Canopy Sign Details Exhibit I East and West Canopy Detail Exhibit J Building Sign Detail Exhibit K Detail on Canopy Sign Construction Exhibit L Dispenser Detail Exhibit M Lighting Details Exhibit N Perspective Views of Valero Station APPROVALS: ' fl - "L / '�� — Norm4h Wpisbrod, Tech Tical Advisor Je'gF Beisw/,/nger, Planning Manager Page 4 Date r Date PLANNING COMMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE REMODELING OF AN EXISTING VALERO SELF-SERVICE GAS STATION AT 6301 COMMERCE BOULEVARD (APN 143-051-009) (Lex Croffroth Architect) WHEREAS, the applicant, Lex Croffroth, filed Planning Application No. PLSR2016- 0001 for Site Plan and Architectural Review to allow remodeling of an existing Valero self -serve gas station at 6301 Commerce Boulevard (APN 143- 051-009), in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PLSR2016-0001 was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, on April 28, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed Planning Application No. PLSR2016-0001 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support of or opposition to the project; and WHEREAS, at the April 28, 2016, Planning Commission meeting, upon considering all testimony and arguments of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all the facts relating to Planning Application No. PLSR2016-0001. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Factors considered. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PLSR2016-0001, makes the following findings: A. That the developments general appearance is compatible with existing development and enhances the surrounding neighborhood. Criteria Satisfied. The remodeled fueling facility will be similar in appearance and will be compatible with the surrounding commercial development. The proposal will result in an improved appearance of the canopy, fuel dispensers and the small building used as a food store. There will also be a new refuse enclosure that will be compatible with the appearance of the remodeled building. B. That the development incorporates a variation from adjacent on-site and off-site structures in height, bulk, and area; arrangement on the parcel; openings or breaks in the fagade facing the street; and/or the line and pitch of the roof. Criteria Satisfied. The canopy over the pump islands and the equipment and office enclosure are not large structures and their location is compatible with other buildings in the vicinity. The actual change in the appearance of the site and arrangement of facilities will be minimal. C. That the development will be located and oriented in such a manner so as to provide pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular connections with adjacent properties, as appropriate, and avoids indiscriminate location and orientation. Criteria Satisfied. The property is very well located for customer access from both Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Boulevard. The development is easily accessible to cyclists and pedestrians even though the site is primarily attractive to motorists. Section 3. Environmental Clearance. This proposal is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15302 replacement of existing commercial structure with a new structure. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Planning Application No. PLSR2016-0001 subject to the following conditions: 1. The Site Plan and Architectural Review approval shall expire one year from the Planning Commission approval date, unless prior to the expiration a building permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion and the use is initiated, or an extension is requested and approved. 2. The facility shall comply with any and all applicable provisions of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code and any state or federal agency. 3. Any landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. 4. Prior to the installation of any signs, the applicant shall submit an application for Sign Review. 5. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan for staff approval providing for additional tree and shrub planting along the Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Boulevard frontages. A minimum of two new trees shall be planted on each street frontage. 6. The applicant shall conform to regulations and agencies that govern gasoline facilities and the installation of piping from the underground storage tanks to the new fuel dispensers. 7. The chain link enclosure on the west side of the building shall be painted to match the colors of the building. 8. A minimum of two bicycle parking spaces shall be provided proximate to the building entrance, as required by the Zoning Ordinance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said action shall not be deemed final until the appeal period has expired and that the appeal period shall be ten (10) working days from the date of said action. No building permits shall be issued until the appeal period has expired, providing there are no appeals. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of April, 2016 by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: AYES: NOES ADAMS BLANQUIE Attest: ABSENT IS•C.: ABSTAIN: GIUDICE HAYDON John Borba Chairperson, Rohnert Park Planning Commission Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary ROHNERT PARK VALERO PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS a (.BAR 2 8 2016 ary OF ROHNERT PARK Exhibit A J Q m U) tl Z� w w~ J U) t Q F- W Z tY W Q I Al LEX COFFROTH ARCHITECT 1122 J STREET SUITE 20 SACRAMENTO,CA 95811 I 916-804-9300 caarchk tlink net N H C� Y 06 =Y W �CC V G NO w W J Q i LIST OF PLANS: Q^ Al COVER SHEET n Cl PRELIM. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN Ell PRELIM. n/ PHOTOMETRIC PLAN LJ� A1.1 ENTITLEMENT SITE W PLANS 6 A2 DEVELOPMENT VIEWS Z _ A2 1 EXISTING STORE V 2 v MODIFICATIONS A2 2 NEW CANOPY RCP & ELEVATIONS W O W o a a o MATERIALS 6 A3 BUILDING d 4 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. m VALERO ID PACKAGE PLANS 1 THRU 5 W N Exhibit A J Q m U) tl Z� w w~ J U) t Q F- W Z tY W Q I Al R01 'INERT PARK EXPY A -N 143-051-073 SITE DEMOLITION PLAN ,0,-0. --------- - \ - I N -- — N I '/x,,.12" MIN. I I ' I I I ' I I L PLAN NEW TRASH ENCLOSURE ADD PRE -ENG MTL.- ROOF W/ MTL =ASCIA, GUTTER @ REAR W/ D S., PAINT 70 MATCH WAIL ROH'V-RT PARK -XPY 76IW " EX STING PANT -RS TO REMAN EXISTING DRV_WPY r W/ EXiSTINC PLANTINGS, TYP 7. (N) MONOV--N SIGN;` SEE SIGN lr, Vm.%r,, S � n a NO (q coiac oACNc TO RENAi\, 't '4 RENCVE A\D REFACE AS REO'D FOR • % RC IV- lm,%G VIRIk,-5_t@ �,, � , . (E) INDERGROUND XISTING Urs+=.:..vrt�* TANKS TO REMA N, r DRI%'FWAY y IITI I RE -IPE TO STAtL Nxa/ ,a, I ' I (N) DISPENS=_RS -fkcUSSIOLE 0" fl 0 '-- RAW 1._0.. 3A.- 1-2'_ 6. -o' I.A t [r, EY S'tIlY' P � �j yy f6 CANCI'1 •.,y � +>�___. j R .,ATE r �`-' - c' I y I i r0, CY V NEW 0 G CANOPY& 1 1 a EXISTING FUEL CONVENIENCE ; ISLANDS a d F71 (`) ORT -414 STORE ORAQE. W/ 1z6ad-l- i I g uj I scr<FEN ( + T CAvars[ 1 W4 ............t. 11 I CD L`, -II_ �J lo'• 4� __ 9/� Ir: � (N) OVERHEAD (N) ACCESSIBLE— "*"" CANOPY fr EXISTING a RAM° '°` ; " DRIVEWAY y L•� 5i r 1 ( APN. 113 051 010 - if w API: 143 -DT -D73 4 SITE MODIFICATION PLAN u2, SOUTHSLID NIP TH i5IQQ D2 jlll�ll illill EAST�FRONT) L STI GATE WEST (REAR) IC. BLK CA- STUCCO A STUCCO -IN. CONIC BILK WkL 10 IT (E; SIGN TO R:41AIA, SEC 51w.. D --"V INC DA'C'S 1'CIR R, r ACING1 11 (E) PLANTER 70 r REVhN W/ (E) I, rLANlNGS H 0 2C' 40' Exhibit B 11" INER :I H COTROld RRCITITEC 1722 „ STREET, SU:'E 20 SACRAVENTO, CA 95811 P IONS (916) 801-9300 E-MAIL: cacrcI14, 11ink.rel )2016 --X COFFROTF - ARCHITECT A.ANS MAY NOT BE REVISED, COPLD, OR RUSE8 WITI OUT PR',07 WRITTEN PERMSSIO\ 0- EX WFR811 , A RCI LITE: ' WHITEY'S TBA, INC. 465 A KENWOOD CT SANTA ROSA, CA 95407 REVISIONS DESCRIPTION [r. ADD TRASH' ENCLOSURE RO 44/ ROHNERTPARK VALERO 6301 COMMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928 r-NTITLL'U= NT SITE PLAN I�OD FICkTjONS DATE: 3/21/16 SHEET \0. PRoaq: 1S -070L SCALE: AS %DIED A 1 DRAWN BY: �c CHECKED B+: AAC PAINT (E) RAISED- INSTALL (N) ACM r -- - �F�ROOF AREA-- --- --- PANELS 0/ (E) II `` I FASCIA, TYP. A L- -._.- -__ T - -- --4!PAINT J `LINE OF BE T- - 7 I - CANOPY BEYOND, I ISHOWN DASHED, TYP UPPER AREA H JAI- PAINT (E)�I —PAINT LOWER AREA D2IVENT PIPING,II I Tff. r� [] .EXISTING STORE WEST EEE VATION PAINT (E) FENCINGD2 '-PAINT (E) ELEC. PANEL D2 ,f: ` 3/16"- I70' (N) VINYL SIGNAGE, PAINT (E) RAISEDSEE "SIGN DEVELOP. �-INSTALL (N) ACM E ROOFIIFWF - .._---_-.-.--------- IIIC,-DWG`S-" - ' -PANELS 0/ (E) I FFISCIA, TYP, L -1T-------Tr--- ----------- Tr-_-� LINE OF (N) CANOPY IN FOREGROUND, SHOWN DASHED, TYP, MTL. TEX-COTE W/ REVEALS, TYP. D1 MTL. TEX-COTE W/ REVEALS, TYP D'2 EXISTING STORE EAST ELEVATION (E) ACCESSIBLE (E) STOREFRONT SYSTEM TO REMAIN, DOORS TO REMAIN PAINT (E) FRAMES, TYP. U PAINT (E) RAISED all INSTALL (N) ACM LOCATION (SEE PLANS): MANUF / BRAND ROOF AREA BUILDING FASCIA PANELS­(E)------------"--_------,-^-- ACM OR EQ- SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7718 OAK CREEK _-_--� El BLDG. FASCIA I- FA A TYP LIGHT, REPLACE, U ❑B CANOPY COLUMN -�T---�- ----- - - - -.- -- -----_J mill (N) MTL. TEX-COTE II LINE OF (N) CANOPY, SHOWN DASHED. TYP li DISPENSERS FUEL ISLANDS GRAPHICS C I METAL TEX-COTE INSTALL 0/ (E) METAL D1: UPPER PANELS - VALERO SAND - JONES D� PANELS W/ REVEALS BLDG PANELS ALL WALLS BLAIR A4W-8002 .EXCEPT WEST (REAR) D2: LOWER PANELS - SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6125 W/ REVEALS, TYP. D1 I CRAFT PAPER IFASCIAABOVE 'PAINTED E%(STING IE%(STING RA15ED ROOF, - (N) MTL TEX-COTE I I I +SHOWN r PNL W/ REVEALS, TYP.D2 I I 'p "-CLOSE (E) DOOR & WNDW., REPLACE W/ TYP. WALL & (N) FINISH 22 EXISTING STORE SOUTH ELEVATION 3/16'ri'-0 INSTALL (N) ACM PAINT (E) RAISED h PANELS 0/ (E) ROOF AREA - - - -FASCIA�P_ -1 �E I I L- _--. .---- — T. -- _— - i I LINE OF (N) CANOPY. I I SHOWN DASHED, TYP I II ri II li I I I D1 (N) MTL TEX-COT I I i PNL W/ REVEALS, TYP D2 (N) MTL TEX-COT I I I I PNL. W/ REVEALS, TYP II II EXISTING STORE NORTH ELEVATION (E) STCRlFM(ANT SYSTEM To REMAIN, r� II (E) UN 3/16-- l'-0` 1 E -III l - , IE !PAINT (E) FRAMES, TYP ACCESSIBLE ' . iii-- MATERIALS SCHEDULE: all MATERIAL LOCATION (SEE PLANS): MANUF / BRAND BUILDING FASCIA (E) SOFFIT ACM OR EQ- SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7718 OAK CREEK El BLDG. FASCIA LIGHT, REPLACE, U ❑B CANOPY COLUMN CANOPY mill SEE "SIGN DEVELOP. INC " DWG'S FOR DISPENSER © EXISTING STORE NORTH ELEVATION (E) STCRlFM(ANT SYSTEM To REMAIN, r� II (E) UN 3/16-- l'-0` 1 E -III l - , IE !PAINT (E) FRAMES, TYP ACCESSIBLE ' . iii-- MATERIALS SCHEDULE: MARK: MATERIAL LOCATION (SEE PLANS): MANUF / BRAND BUILDING FASCIA (E) SOFFIT ACM OR EQ- SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7718 OAK CREEK El BLDG. FASCIA LIGHT, REPLACE, PAINTED STL COLUMN, VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN) ❑B CANOPY COLUMN CANOPY I TYP. SEE "SIGN DEVELOP. INC " DWG'S FOR DISPENSER © DISPENSERS FUEL ISLANDS GRAPHICS C I METAL TEX-COTE INSTALL 0/ (E) METAL D1: UPPER PANELS - VALERO SAND - JONES D� PANELS W/ REVEALS BLDG PANELS ALL WALLS BLAIR A4W-8002 .EXCEPT WEST (REAR) D2: LOWER PANELS - SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6125 CRAFT PAPER IFASCIAABOVE 'PAINTED E%(STING IE%(STING RA15ED ROOF, SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7504 KEYSTONE GRAY SURFACE VENT RISERS, MISC +SHOWN ----------------------- 28 -U I/- , ! "Ir � Hit , - I, 1 I Exhibit C 4 EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE own LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT 1722 J STREET, SUITE 20 SACRAMENTO, CA 95811 PHONE: (916) 804-9300 E-MAIL: caarchiki link.net 02016 LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT ILANS MAY NOT BE REVISED, COPIED, OR TUSED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION )F LEX COFFROTH. ARCHITECT. CONTRACTOR: WHITEYIS TBA, INC. 465 A KENWOOD CT SANTA ROSA, CA 95407 OWNERS 1 REVISIONS j NO I DESCRIPTION I DATE ROHNERT PARK VALERO 6301 COMMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 94926 APN:143-051-009 I(E) STORE MODIFICATIONS IDAIE: 3/21/16 SHEET NO IPROJ.q: 15-0704 / n 'SCALE: AS NOTED L� / ` (DRAWN BY: cc LL OMB BY: LC. (E) SOFFIT El LIGHT, REPLACE, I TYP. mrrjFI . :PIR P C I LINE OF (E) SOFFIT/ IFASCIAABOVE i11DASHED, +SHOWN 'p TYP. A.I R g I I I I uuluLING ❑ONUUNICNUO!1➢COR- I L NOLL ORK I r I 1 I II L- I J I -----.-----------_ ----J Exhibit C 4 EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE own LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT 1722 J STREET, SUITE 20 SACRAMENTO, CA 95811 PHONE: (916) 804-9300 E-MAIL: caarchiki link.net 02016 LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT ILANS MAY NOT BE REVISED, COPIED, OR TUSED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION )F LEX COFFROTH. ARCHITECT. CONTRACTOR: WHITEYIS TBA, INC. 465 A KENWOOD CT SANTA ROSA, CA 95407 OWNERS 1 REVISIONS j NO I DESCRIPTION I DATE ROHNERT PARK VALERO 6301 COMMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 94926 APN:143-051-009 I(E) STORE MODIFICATIONS IDAIE: 3/21/16 SHEET NO IPROJ.q: 15-0704 / n 'SCALE: AS NOTED L� / ` (DRAWN BY: cc LL OMB BY: LC. NORTH ELEVATION E ; it .o> _ It V ISI EAST (FRONT) ELEVATION E A D2 MATERIALS SCHEDULE FOR B ILDING: A = ACM OR EQ. MTL. FASCIA PANELS SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7718 OAK CREEK D1 = METAL TEX-COTE WALL PANELS W/ REVEAL STRIPS, AS SHOWN VALERO SAND - JONES BLAIR A4W- 8002 D2= METAL TEX-COTE WALL PANELS W/ REVEAL STRIPS, AS SHOWN SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6125 CRAFT PAPER E = PAINTED MISC. SURFACES SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7504 KEYSTONE GRAY I � - D1 = D2 Exhibit D LEX COFFROTH ARCHITECT 1722 J STREET SUITE 20 ' SACRAMENTO, CA 95811 916-804-9300 Icaarch@citlink net Z H Z) C� Y 06 tr w WY V 01-0 LuJ Y ry F- it Lu Z W 0 W o 0 o m J a F- U) m Q U) w zQ w� w� Wz �o J_ ZZ) w m u Q3 u� �1 YP. DLLARD NOTE: SEE "SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC." IMAGE COMPANY /�� NEW CANOPY EAST ELEVATION /WEST SMILARI PLANS TO CANOPY, DISPENSER, BUILDING SIGNAGE, t? 1 1 JJ MONUMENT SIGN LOCATIONS, COLOR, SIZE, ETC 55 -0 55._0" I EXTEND "EYEBROW' 4'-0' 10'-6" 34'-O" 0/ C STORE VALER (E) STORE FASCIA SEE "SIGN DEVELOP. INC." IMAGE II Self DWG'S FOR SIGNAGE/GRAPHICS INFO, SIZES, COLORS, ETC (E) C -STORE (E)SIDEWAIK NEW CANOPY SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH SIMILAR 3/16'.1'-0- PROPOSED CANOPY CEILING PLAN 3/1 1 1 60'-0" LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT 10'-0" I 16'-0" 1 - 24•_0" 10._0., EXTEND CANOP 1 0/ C -STORE 4 "EYEBROW" WEST, SEE PLAN ACM OR EO- SEE 'SIGN DEV, INC.." PLANS FOR SACRAMENTO, CA 95811 � I — LJ VN= 2 vium Y1LlIgM - T E �1 YP. DLLARD NOTE: SEE "SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC." IMAGE COMPANY /�� NEW CANOPY EAST ELEVATION /WEST SMILARI PLANS TO CANOPY, DISPENSER, BUILDING SIGNAGE, t? 1 1 JJ MONUMENT SIGN LOCATIONS, COLOR, SIZE, ETC 55 -0 55._0" I EXTEND "EYEBROW' 4'-0' 10'-6" 34'-O" 0/ C STORE VALER (E) STORE FASCIA SEE "SIGN DEVELOP. INC." IMAGE II Self DWG'S FOR SIGNAGE/GRAPHICS INFO, SIZES, COLORS, ETC (E) C -STORE (E)SIDEWAIK NEW CANOPY SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH SIMILAR 3/16'.1'-0- PROPOSED CANOPY CEILING PLAN 3/1 MATERIALS SCHEDULE: MARK: D _6 LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT 1 v =o I H} J� 1722 J STREET, SUITE 20 ACM OR EO- SEE 'SIGN DEV, INC.." PLANS FOR SACRAMENTO, CA 95811 CANOPY FASCIA CANOPY — LJ PHONE`. (916) 804-9300 2 E-MAIL: Icaarch0citlink.net C 102016 LEX COFFROTH - ARCHITECT CANOPY COLUMN CANOPY PLANS MAY NOT BE REVISED, COPIED, OR REUSED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF LEX COEFROTH. ARCHITECT. D AMP DISPENSERS FUEL ISLANDS GRAPHICS METAL TEX-COTE INSTALL O/ (E) METAL D1: UPPER PANELS - VALERO SAND - JONES �ry PANELS W/ REVEALS BLDG PANELS ALL WALLS BLAIR A4W-6002 •-• U CONTRACTOR: D2: LOWER PANELS - SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6125 WHITEY'S TBA, INC. CRAFT PAPER 465 A KENWOOD CT. PAINTED EXISTING SANTA ROSA, CA SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7504 KEYSTONE GRAY 95407 MATERIALS SCHEDULE: MARK: MATERIAL: LOCATION (SEE PLANS) MANUE / BRAND ACM OR EO- SEE 'SIGN DEV, INC.." PLANS FOR CANOPY FASCIA CANOPY COLOR CALLOUTS. STL COLUMN, VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN) ❑'PAINTED B CANOPY COLUMN CANOPY SEE "SIGN DEVELOP INC" DWG'S FOR DISPENSER © DISPENSERS FUEL ISLANDS GRAPHICS METAL TEX-COTE INSTALL O/ (E) METAL D1: UPPER PANELS - VALERO SAND - JONES �ry PANELS W/ REVEALS BLDG PANELS ALL WALLS BLAIR A4W-6002 •-• U EXCEPT WEST (REAR) D2: LOWER PANELS - SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6125 CRAFT PAPER PAINTED EXISTING EXISTING RAISED ROOF, SHERWIN WILLIAMS 7504 KEYSTONE GRAY SURFACE VENT RISERS, MISC Exhibit E OWNERS: REVISIONS NO I DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR: ROHNERT PARK VALERO 6301 COMMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928 APN: 143-051 -009 bHttl HILL NEW CANOPY RCP & ELEVATIONS DATE: 3/21/16 SHEET NO PROJ: 15-0704 SCALE: 3/16,77, A 2 . 2 DRAWN BY: cc CHECKED BY: L C zP T D Z P X LI N Z O � C O o G Z 'V ASPHALT N ROHNERT PARK EXPY 76 00' ,� p f! tom nh+gl SIGN 1 I'UOIRR 'ASE N09'23'441 d i25.GW �wdt Nq �� a 1�Le11 „ NEw SIGN q PWRFR PLAWER La-- — i— —. f SII oil oll�©f I IR II 19 I l o II o II I ! II II I I o I 4 II III I I a / 55'C,- 28' o 0 C) NEW µ i n M ANOP'Y [� �7 1 r1 OTHERS o EXISTING I CU BUILDING c r - Pa APN: 143-051-010r`� /.l t 4,1 ktA1MJ! f � 'v ASPHALT 'V APN: 143-051-073 1 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary Information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME DATE 2111rN 40 00 A0 NO. Q8960 DATE: 03.01.16BA REV: 03.23.16BA Exhibit F EXISTING SITE Sig_ n Development Inc. SITE PLAN License #576277 SCALE: 1/32"=1'-0" Upland, CA 91 786 (909) 920-5535 PAGE: 1 OF 5 VA L E R ROHM RT PA K 6301 COMMERCECA 9 928 VERIFY 60" 0 w 1 6" SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" I, ) REFACE EXISTING D/F PRICE CABINET `1 WITH FLAT LEXAN FACES. INSTALL NEW D/F LOGO CABINET. 30.00 sq. ft. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document, including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. F 1 6" SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 INSTALL NEW INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED D/F PRICE/ID SIGN 30.00 sq. ft. CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME DATE REMOVE EXISTING LOGO CABINET, INSTALL NEW CABINET J) EXISTING D/F PRICE/ID SIGN INSTALL NEW INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED D/F PRICEAD SIGN Sign Development Inc. Exhibit G License #576277 Upland, CA 91786 (909) 920-5535 NO. Q8960 PAGE: 2 OF 5 AL E R ROHN R 6301 ST PARK, CA 9 928 DATE: 03.01.16BA MERCE BLVD. REV: 03.23.16BA 124" I � Illuminated Valero Copy See Detail CAN -1 _ 55'-0" NEW CANOPY BY OTHERS NON-ILLUM] "DOG EARS" PAINT CANOPY COLUMNS VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN) (JONES BLAIRA4W-0001) NORTH CANOPY ELEVATION 43.22 sq. ft. NOTES: PAINT ALL BUMPER POLES VALERO TEAL. PAINT CANOPY COLUMNS VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN). INSTALL NEW VALERO TRASH CADDIES. 41-091 j24„ d 1 J Illuminated Valero Copy See Detail CAN -1+ 41 55'-0" 4'-0" 24"1 1 1 1 Illuminated Valero Logo See Detail CAN -1 SCALE: 1/8"= F-0" 24" NEW CANOPY BY OTHERS Illuminated Valero Logo See Detail CAN -1 NON -ILLUMINATED - "DOG EARS" PAINT CANOPY COLUMNS VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN) (JONES BLAIR A4W-000 1) SOUTH CANOPY ELEVATION 43.22 sq. ft. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document, including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. SCALE: 1/8"= V-0" CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME DATE EXISTING CANOPY TO BE REMOVED Sign Development Inc. Exhibit H License #576277 Upland, CA 91786 (909) 920-5535 NO. Q8960 PAGE: 3 OF 5 MERCE BLVD. DATE: 03.01.16BA VALE R ROHMR6301 RT PARK, CA 9 928 REV: 03.23.16BA NEW CANOPY BY OTHERS EAST CANOPY ELEVATION •1 1 PAINT CANOPY COLUMNS VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN) (JONES BLAIR A4W-000 1) SCALE: 1/8"= F-0" NOTES: PAINT ALL BUMPER POLES VALERO TEAL. PAINT CANOPY COLUMNS VALERO CASABLANCA (TAN). INSTALL NEW VALERO TRASH CADDIES. R1 1 327-0" WEST CANOPY ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1 °-0" PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document, including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME DATE NO. Q8960 DATE: 03.01.16BA REV: 03.23.16BA Exhibit I PAGE: 4 OF 5 EXISTING CANOPY TO BE REMOVED Sign Development Inc. License #576277 Upland, CA 91786 (909) 920-5535 MERCE VALERO6301 ROHM RST PARK, BLVD. CA 94928 SW 7504 KEYSTONE GRAY SW 7718 OAK CREEK VALERO SAND (JONES BLAIR A4)A SW 6125 CRAFT EAST BUILDING ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= F-0" 112" '= �(a to [i A if�r,(o SCALE:3/8" = V-0" NORTH BUILDING ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= V-0" EXISTING BUILDING O INSTALL NEW NON -ILLUMINATED WHITE VINYL FOOD SHOP COPY 14.00 sq. ft. Sign Development Inc. Exhibit J License#576277 Upland, CA 91 786 (909) 920-5535 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME NO. Q8960 PAGE: 5 OF 5 DATE: 03.01.16BAVAL ' R� ROHM R 6301 SMERCE BLVD. T PARK, CA 9 928 REV: 03.23.16BA VALERO TEAL (PANTONE 315C) 0 VALERO YELLOW (PANTONE 123C) - 3M OPAQUE VINYL "" T �"^ FELLOW (PANTONE 123C) - 3M TRANSLUCENT VINYL ;AL (PANTONE 315C) - 3M OPAQUE VINYL 42" N[ M 42" ' N '.LLOW (PANTONE 123C) - 3M OPAQUE VINYL VALERO TEAL (PANTONE 315C) - 3M TRANSLUCENT VINYL 24" 101-499 5" 11 '-9 '/2" I i In 2'-10 7/16" 1 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It Is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. 1 36" 6" NEW CHANNEL CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME CHANNEL LETTER DETAILS LED ILLUMINATION # 12 x 1' HEX WASHER I HEADDRILL & TAP SMS I I (3'-0'704'-0' O.C•ATTA.CHED TO EXISTING CANOP ;S a ti 5„ .050" WHITE ALUMINUM RETURNS A— —I" I "WHITE TRIM CAP I lal LEDs PER VALERO 13 I . - WALLAINCHOR.SOR OR SPECIFICATIONAND— I [�� #12 TEC SCREWS x 1" LONG APPROVED SUPPLIER I (TYP. 4 TO 6 PER LOGO/LETTER) I I .050" ALUMINUM BACKS I 1 I 1 3/16" ACRYLIC FACE I I # 12 x 1' HEX WASHER I HEADDRILL & TAP SMS I I (3'-0'704'-0' O.C•ATTA.CHED TO EXISTING CANOP ;S a ti r EXISTING CANOPY ACM FASCIA WITH ILLUMINATED COPY CAN -1 NO, Q8960 PAGE: DATE: 03.01.16BA REV: 03.23.16BA SUPPLY SWITCH ;.PRIMARY CIRCLII'I' Exhibit K Sign Development Inc. License #576277 Upland, CA 91 786 (909) 920-5535 VALERO6301 COMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 9 928 I U I w l�� r EXISTING CANOPY ACM FASCIA WITH ILLUMINATED COPY CAN -1 NO, Q8960 PAGE: DATE: 03.01.16BA REV: 03.23.16BA SUPPLY SWITCH ;.PRIMARY CIRCLII'I' Exhibit K Sign Development Inc. License #576277 Upland, CA 91 786 (909) 920-5535 VALERO6301 COMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 9 928 SIX (6) NEW DISPENSERS TO BE FACTORY IMAGED TYPICAL VALERO DISPENSER FOR REFERENCE 71WIVALER0- PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. The information disclosed in this document, including all drawings, designs and related materials, is the valuable and proprietary information of Sign Development Inc. It is provided solely for the purpose of evaluation for purchase and, without the express written authorization of Sign Development Inc., may not be disclosed or duplicated, in whole or in part, for any reason. Sign Development Inc. expressly reserves all patent, copyright and other proprietary rights to this document, including all design, manufacturing, reproduction, use, and sales rights thereto. © 2011 SIGN DEVELOPMENT INC. CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGN AND PRINT FULL NAME DATE NO. 08960 DATE: 03.01.16BA REV: 03.23.16BA USE TEMPLATE PROVIDED FOR PLACEMENT Exhibit L PAGE: Sign Development Inc. License #576277 Upland, CA 91 786 (909) 920-5535 VALERO6301 COMMERCE BLVD. ROHNERT PARK, CA 9 928 VIEW NORTH WEST FROM COMMERCE VIEW NORTHWEST FROM COMMERCE VIEW SOUTHWEST FROM COMMERCE & ROHNERT PARK EXPWY iia:;M111VALOW IT, IIT, I�: Exhibit N LEX COFFROTH ARCHITECT 1722 J STREET SUITE 20 SACRAMENTO,CA 95811 916-804-9300 Icaarch@citlink net Z Q N H D C� Y W WC_Y v G 0 6L W J Q Y Il' Q fl F— ry W Z.70_ W W v m W (D �, yr- Q y e�-, O 1 JZ �2 20 m J C) > W Z0 W � W LLJ U) J 0 U) Zww W IZ > A2 City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Report DATE: April 28, 2016 ITEM NO: 8.2 SUBJECT: Review of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development — North Bay Communities, LLC LOCATION: Former State Farm site, bounded by Rohnert Park Expressway, State Farm Drive, Enterprise Drive and Seed Farm Drive/future SMART platform (APN 143-051-072). REQUEST: Planning Commission Review of the Revised Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) for the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development APPLICANT: North Bay Communities LLC, a subsidiary of SunCal Background The Planned Development (P -D) Zoning District is intended to accommodate a wide range of residential, commercial and industrial land uses, which are mutually -supportive and compatible with existing and proposed development on surrounding properties. This district is typically used for projects that provide for a mix of land uses to serve identified community needs. All standards, requirements, densities, land use designations and other contents of an approved final development plan for the P -D zoning district must be consistent with the city's general plan and any applicable specific plan. In order to establish a P -D zoning district, Article VII of Chapter 17.06 (Land Use Regulations) of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code requires that the applicant submit a Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) including initial development standards, land uses and phasing for review. The PDP process then includes review and comment by the Parks and Recreation Commission with regard to proposed parklands. Per the Municipal Code Section 17.06.250, the Planning Commission will receive the Parks and Recreation Commission comments and consider them along with the PDP and review "whether the land uses proposed and their interrelationships are generally acceptable and consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. The commission shall indicate conceptual approval or disapproval of the preliminary development plan." Following this non-binding review and conceptual approval Page 1 of the PDP, the applicants may submit a formal application for a Planned Development designation, which is subject to environmental analysis and public hearings. Parks and Recreation Commission Review The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the Rohnert Crossings PDP at their January 22, 2016 meeting. The Commission discussed the size, layout and configuration of new park areas within the proposed Planned Development. The Commission discussed the more urban style of park amenities presented with the proposed Rohnert Crossing project, the parkland locations and amenities. In addition, the three private park amenities within the residential component of the proposed plan were reviewed along with their availability for park credits. The Parks and Recreation Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the PDP related to parks with the following specific recommendations: • Consideration of a place for dogs; • Potential inclusion of a skate feature and an adaptive playground; • Reversing the locations of CN -2 (Commercial/Civic Use) and CN -3 (Parking Area) to provide a continuous park area along RPX; • Moving the gazebo to a less central location to allow for greater open space area within OS -1; and • Possible relocation of the bocce court; • Consideration of the use of Valley oak trees in the landscaping; and • Use of in -lieu fees at a community park location that would serve the residents of this project. Commission will consider these comments and the applicant can use the feedback in preparation of the Final Development Plan. (Note that the comment regarding reversing the locations of CN - 2 and CN -3 to provide a continuous park area along RPX, has been addressed in a revised PDP, described below.) Planning Commission Review The Rohnert Crossings PDP was considered by the Planning Commission on February 25, 2016. A variety of comments on the proposed PDP were made by the Planning Commission. A summary of Planning Commission comments on the PDP from February 25, 2016 is provided in Attachment C. The consideration of this PDP was continued to a future meeting to give the applicant an opportunity to respond to these comments. At the same meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan to the City Council, excluding revisions recommended by staff regarding a minimum requirement for commercial square footage within the Station Center Subarea, which is coterminous with the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development site. The City Council subsequently adopted the PDA Plan on March 22, 2016, with the addition of the requirement for a minimum of 150,000 square feet of commercial use within the Station Center Subarea and the provision for the reduction of lanes on State Farm Drive south of Rohnert Park Expressway from four to two. Page 2 The applicant submitted a revised PDP for Rohnert Crossings that responds to the comments received at the February 25th Planning Commission hearing and the March 22nd City Council hearing, as described below. Revised Preliminary Development Plan The Rohnert Crossings Planned Development is a plan for approximately 30 acres in the City of Rohnert Park. The site is adjacent to the planned SMART station located to the east. The project site is shown as the Station Center Subarea within the PDA. The applicants have submitted a revised Preliminary Development Plan for Rohnert Crossings (Attachment A). The Illustrative Site Plan provides an overview of plan components on page 2 of Attachment A. The plan addresses the future development of the project site, which is comprised of residential, commercial, mixed use and parks/open space. Elevations and renderings of potential future development are provided on pages 9 and 10 of Attachment A. Notable revisions from the previous plan include the following: 120,000 square feet of active retail and service commercial uses Added commercial (further south) fronting State Farm Drive to take advantage of diagonal parking a Residential units above commercial (MU -1) to give extra building height a Relocation of commercial use closer to SMART Station — this use is identified as a potential hotel site • Removal of retail flex space in MF -1 (formerly MU -2) The proposed Land Use Plan is shown on page 3 of Attachment A. Specifically, the plan includes approximately 400 high and medium density residential units, 120,000 square feet of active retail and service commercial uses, and approximately 5.44 acres of parks and open spaces. The proposed uses are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Rohnert Crossings Preliminary Development Plan Land Use Amount Retail/Service Commercial 120,000 sf Multifamily Residential 150 units Townhomes 250 units Parks and open space 5.44 acres • The Preliminary Development Plan (page 2 of Attachment A) shows (1) the expanded retail village at the southeast corner of Rohnert Park Expressway and State Farm Drive, (2) the commercial use (potential hotel) along Rohnert Park Expressway near the SMART station, (3) the mixed use residential/commercial uses (retail with multi -family residential above), (4) open space/amenities, and (5) the townhomes. Proposed phasing of development is shown on page 5 of Attachment A. Page 3 • A total of 120,000 square feet of retail/commercial uses would be located within the retail village, the commercial area, and the mixed use area. • A total of 150 multifamily residential units would be located within the multi -family and mixed use areas at a density of approximately 35 du/ac. • A total of 250 townhome units at a density of 30 du/ac would be located in the southern portion of the site. • The project proposes a total of 5.44 acres of parks and open space, as shown on page 3 of Attachment A. Proposed open space includes the existing redwood grove along the perimeter of the site (OS -4, OS -5, OS -6, and OS -7). The proposed parks include a park/town square at the intersection of State Farm Drive and Rohnert Park Expressway (OS -1), open space including existing and new trees along Rohnert Park Expressway near the SMART Station (OS -2), a "central park" (OS -3), SMART Station Park (OS -8). The conceptual park plans are shown on page 7 of Attachment A. • The parking diagram on page 4 of Attachment A indicates the proposed parking for the Plan. In addition to the on-site parking, this includes 162 diagonal parking spaces on State Farm Drive. This type of configuration would require reduction of State Farm Drive to 2 lanes (one in each direction), as provided for in the PDA Plan. ■ The Conceptual Circulation Plan (page 6 of Attachment A) shows a variety of multi- modal transportation enhancements, including a complete pedestrian network, vehicular circulation, and potential bus routes. Dedicated pedestrian paths and alleys are shown linking each neighborhood within the project site, as well as linking the project site to adjacent areas, including the SMART Station platform and Multi Use Path. Vehicular circulation includes two primary streets (Station Drive and Road #3) providing access from State Farm Drive and Enterprise Drive. Minor streets and alleys are shown within the residential areas. Proposed street sections for State Farm Drive are shown on page 8 of Attachment A. • The Conceptual Parking Plan (page 4 of Attachment A) shows the proposed location of future parking facilities and provides a summary of required parking and proposed parking. A total of 1,380 parking spaces would be required for build -out of the land uses and a total of 1,392 spaces are proposed. The parking adjacent to the commercial uses in the northern portion of the site has been relocated between the retail and commercial uses. • The proposed PDP includes the City -owned Public Works corporation yard within the proposed project, consistent with the PDA Plan. Staff Analysis The purpose of the preliminary review of the PDP is to obtain input and conceptual approval or disapproval of the plan from the Planning Commission as to the consistency of the proposed land uses with the General Plan and applicable specific plans. As described above, the proposed land uses with the Rohnert Crossing PDP include: • 400 residential units within the High Density Residential and Mixed Use zones; Page 4 * 120,000 square feet of Neighborhood Commercial and Retail uses; and * 5.44 acres of public parks and open space. The PDP application also includes an illustrative site plan, some examples of potential design concepts, possible park amenities and a phasing plan to provide the Commission with an overview of the applicant's preliminary concepts. No specific review of the design aspects of the proposal is required at the PDP stage. Staff has prepared a detailed General Plan and PDA consistency analysis for the revised PDP proposal (see Attachment B). The current General Plan land use designation of the proposed Rohnert Crossings site, as amended by the PDA Plan, is Mixed Use. The PDP is generally consistent with the Mixed Use designation, which allows for a wide range of uses and encourages mixed use developments with a combination of compatible commercial, office and residential development. Figure 4.6: Station Center Land Use Designations The site is identified in the PDA Plan as Station Center District Planned Development (SC -PD). Within the SC -PD zone, five land uses are identified — Commercial Mixed -Use, Residential Mixed -Use, High Density Residential, Office or Civic, and Parks/Open Space. In addition, there is an overlay zone on the northern portion of the site of Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ). The PDA Plan identifies the Rohnert Crossings site (Station Center Subarea) for a higher density urban -type development adjacent to the SMART station and encourages the development of a downtown area within the DDAZ. The PDA Plan allows for a wide range of uses and encourages a combination of compatible active commercial, office, and residential development. Figure 4.6 in the PDA Plan (above) shows the adopted land uses within the Station Center Subarea. Page 5 The revised Rohnert Crossings PDP application (Proposed Land Use Plan on page 3 of Attachment A) calls for a mix of commercial and residential development. The PDA Plan calls for a commercial focused downtown in this area with active retail and service uses, and the PDP reflects this with increased ground -floor retail along State Farm Drive and within the retail village in the northwest corner of the site. The proposed roadways designs in the PDP are generally consistent with the PDA Plan, including the reduction of State Farm Drive from four lanes to two lanes south of Rohnert Park Expressway. The proposed PDP is generally consistent with the general plan, assuming some modifications are made to both the City's general plan and the applicant's proposal as part of the Final Development Plan process. Consistency with specific general plan and zoning provisions are discussed in Attachment B (General Plan and Zoning (PDA) Consistency). Given that this preliminary review is conceptual and requires only a general, rather than precise consistency determination, staff believes that the Planning Commission could find the proposed land uses in the revised PDP submittal to be generally consistent with the SC -PD designation in terms of land use distribution and intensity, so long as the modifications set forth in Attachment B are approved as well.. The Rohnert Crossings PDP devotes more area to residential uses, less to commercial uses and does not include a specific office designation. Modification to the City's general plan and the applicant's proposal can be made during the Final Development to address these inconsistencies. In particular, the commercial area proposed does not meet the minimum requirement of 150,000 square feet for the Station Center within the PDA Plan. In order to achieve full consistency with the City's existing plans, the applicant would need to submit a final PDP that meets the minimum or an amendment to the PDA Station Center Subarea would be required to reduce the minimum commercial square footage. For this reason, staff has recommended revisions to the PDP as shown in Attachment B to achieve consistency with the general plan. Detailed review of consistency with development standards, design guidelines, and parking requirements will be conducted at the time of Final Development Plan review. Differences between the PDA Plan and the Rohnert Crossings PDP are shown in the table below: * Note that these numbers are maximums considered in the PDA Plan for purposes of environmental review, ** 150,000 square feet minimum. Staff continues to work with the applicant and will provide a detailed analysis of the proposed Planned Development during the entitlement review and public hearing process. Planning Commission comments on the size and location of planned land uses onsite and in relationship to the SMART station and adjacent streets and uses will inform future applications. Page 6 PDP PDA (Station Center)* Commercial/Retail 120,000 SF up to 171,626 SF** Residential 400 units up to 415 units Office -- up to 65,340 SF * Note that these numbers are maximums considered in the PDA Plan for purposes of environmental review, ** 150,000 square feet minimum. Staff continues to work with the applicant and will provide a detailed analysis of the proposed Planned Development during the entitlement review and public hearing process. Planning Commission comments on the size and location of planned land uses onsite and in relationship to the SMART station and adjacent streets and uses will inform future applications. Page 6 Next Steps If the amended Rohnert Crossings PDP is conceptually approved by the Planning Commission, a Final Development Plan may be submitted to the City. Conceptual approval of the PDP does not bind the Commission to approval of the Final Development Plan. If subdivision within the district is necessary, then a tentative map may also be applied for at this time. Environmental review of the Final Development Plan will be required under the California Environmental Quality Act. Following appropriate environmental review of the plan, the Planning Commission will consider the application for the final development plan at a public hearing. The Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council based on a review of the environmental impacts of the plan, the appropriateness and interrelationships of the proposed uses, any effects on traffic circulation due to development of the plan, the quality of the suggested site plan design, consistency with the general plan and any applicable specific plan, and other details of the proposed district. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Final Development Plan, the City Council will consider the plan at a public hearing, where it may approve or deny the Final Development Plan or return the matter to the Planning Commission for further evaluation. Environmental Determination Environmental analysis is not required for preliminary review of a PDP. A full analysis of the PDP under CEQA will be conducted for a final development plan. Public Notification This item has been duly noticed by publication in the Community Voice for the Preliminary Review of the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development Preliminary Development Plan. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2016-15: A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park conceptually approving with recommended revisions the Preliminary Development Plan for the Rohnert Crossings Planned Development located south of Rohnert Park Expressway, east of State Farm Drive, north of Enterprise Drive, and west of Seed Farm Drive/future SMART platform in Sonoma County, CA (APN 143-051-072) Attachments: A. Rohnert Crossings Preliminary Development Plan (Exhibit A to the resolution) B. General Plan and Zoning (PDA) Consistency (Exhibit B to the resolution) C. Planning Commission Comments D. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016-15 Page 7 Date ATTACHMENT B Rohnert Crossings, Preliminary Development Plan Consistency with General Plan, Central Rohnert Park, PDA Plan and Zoning Ordinance The purpose of the following matrix is to identify where the Rohnert Crossings, Preliminary Development Plan application is consistent with the adopted general plan, Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan (PDA plan) and related zoning ordinance provisions. General plan amendments were adopted on March 22, 2016 to implement the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan (PDA Plan) and zoning amendments were adopted on April 12, 2016. The following matrix evaluates the April 19, 2016, Rohnert Crossings submittal for consistency with the city's plans and policies, as amended. Goal/Policy or Standard Consistent? General Plan (Consistent) Description Consistent with the Yes The Proposal is generally consistent with the General Plan General Plan, Mixed Use mixed use designation which allows for a wide range of designation? uses and encourages mixed use developments with a combination of compatible commercial, office and residential development. Consistent with Figure Yes Developer proposes a combination of retail, service and 3.2-16 (Boundary of residential uses within the DDAZ. The intent of the DDAZ is Downtown District to focus active retail and service uses on the ground floor. Amenity Zone)? The proposed development plan provides for such uses on the ground floor. Office and/and or residential on upper floors are encouraged in the PDA plan. The PDP would j allow for such uses. General Plan Policies (Consistent) LU -42 (Creation of a Yes Proposed street network, parks, plazas and other site pedestrian -oriented elements provide good connectivity and the concentration downtown, adjacent to of commercial uses along State Farm Drive creates a the SMART rail station) downtown setting. The adequacy of the commercial square footage will be further evaluated at the Final Development Plan stage. LU -44 (Promote infill Yes Development intensity will create pedestrian and other development to activate activity on State Farm Drive. Diagonal parking will provide State Farm Drive) parking for shops and encourage business to locate in this _ area of high visibility. LU -48: (Housing at Yes The number and intensity of dwelling units are within the densities sufficient to range to support transit. 400 units are proposed and this is support transit use) consistent with the PDA plan. TR -49 (Expand bike and Yes Good connectivity is provided with a complete pedestrian connections, interconnected grid system provided throughout the plan including connections to area. SMART) TR -54 (Provide required Yes I It appears that adequate parking is provided and this will parking) be further evaluated at the Final Development Plan stage. Page 1 TR-57 ( Facilitate a "park Yes The proposed site design is conducive to the "park once" once" strategy) strategy and this will be analyzed further as part of the Final Development Plan. CD-56 (Bike and Yes Access to SMART platform is provided by a grid system of pedestrian connectivity streets. Pedestrians and bicyclist will be able access the to the SMART rail station) SMART platform from all sides. Zoning Ordinance / PDA Plan (Consistent) Yes Consistent with Central In general the PDP is consistent with the Central Rohnert Rohnert Park PDA? Park PDA plan as proposed. To achieve complete consistency, however some modifications to the final PDP will be necessary to increase the commercial square footage in the PDP and address office or civic uses. Alternatively the PDA plan could be amended to modify the minimum amount of required commercial square footage and remove or reduce the Office/Civic land uses. The PDA plan calls for a commercially focused downtown Supportive of Downtown Yes District Amenity Zone? with active retail and service uses and the PDP depicts a mix of commercial and residential uses. The revisions to the PDP to increase the active retail and service uses that are provided within the DDAZ is moving in the right direction to fulfill the intent of the recently amended policies establishing a minimum square footage requirement to help create a downtown area. Are proposed street Yes The proposed designs of State Farm Drive and internal designs in the PDA roadways are consistent with the PDA plan. The PDP implemented? proposes adding diagonal parking to State Farm Drive which is consistent with the PDA plan. General Plan (Updates Needed) Consistent with General Update Proposed land uses in the Downtown District amenity Plan, Figure 3.2-15 zone are generally consistent with this diagram, but minor (Central Rohnert Park updates will be needed. The configuration of the land use Plan Concept and the designations will need to be amended in the General Plan, Downtown District PDA plan and zoning ordinance to match to proposal. The Amenity Zone)? Office/Civic designation would need to be revised or removed and the configuration of the land use designations would need to be updated. Alternatively, the Final PDP proposal could be amended to match the current policies, avoiding the need for policy amendments. Zoning Ordinance /PDA Plan (Updates Needed) Provide 150,000 sf of Update The Rohnert Crossings PDP calls for 120,000 sf of retail active retail and service uses — less than the required minimum of 150,000 sf in the uses as required? PDA Plan and zoning ordinance. Updates will be required to lower this minimum requirement or the Final PDP proposal could be amended to meet this requirement. As proposed the PDP would require changes to Figure 4.6 Consistent with Figure Update 4.6 (Station Center Land of the Central Rohnert Park PDA plan and the changes to Use Designations) in PDA the corresponding figure in the General Plan and zoning Page 2 and zoning ordinance? ordinance. The Office/Civic designation would need to be revised or removed and the configuration of the land use designations would need to be updated. Alternatively, the Final PDP proposal could be amended to match the current policies, avoiding the need for policy amendments. General Plan (Determined at Final Development Plan (FDP) Stage) LU -41 (Implement a FDP The street network of the plan interfaces with the SMART Downtown requirements will be needed as part of the Final platform and a plaza is provided adjacent to the platform. District... encompassing Development Plan. It is not clear whether commercial uses will be provided the SMART rail station) This will be determined as part of the Final Development proximate to the SMART platform. Minor updates to the Plan configuration of the retail and service uses may be needed at the Final Development Plan stage. LU -47 (Provide a variety FDP Two types of housing are proposed as part of the PDP of housing types and determined at Final Development Plan application and are consistent with the residential densities) densities ranges in the General Plan and PDA Plan. A plan water strategies into Page 3 for how to comply with city affordable housing requirements will be needed as part of the Final Development Plan. LU -51 (Comply with FDP This will be determined as part of the Final Development inclusionary housing Plan ordinance) CD -57 (Provide public FDP Provided throughout project proposed, final design plazas, gathering places, determined at Final Development Plan and pedestrian amenities) CD -58 (Focus public and FDP Determined as part of Final Development Plan private investments inside the Downtown District Amenity Zone to create an urban downtown streetscape) Determined as part of Final Development Plan CD -59 (Develop a FDP streetscape palette that accents the identity for downtown) CD -63 (High quality FDP Determined as part of Final Development Plan architecture, streetscape, and landscape design features in the Downtown District Amenity Zone) TR -47 (Complete streets) FDP Proposal to change State Farm Drive from a 4 -lane to a 2 - lane facility with on street parking is consistent. Final Street Design will be determined at the Final Development Plan TR -48 (Incorporate storm FDP To be reviewed as part of Final Development Plan water strategies into Page 3 street designs) TR -53 (Bus service to FDP Follow-up work with Sonoma County Transit and SMART coordinate with SMART) will be necessary to implement this TR -55 (Shared parking FDP This will be analyzed as part of the Final Development Plan facilities) Zoning Ordinance / PDA Plan Consistent with FDP The residential uses in the PDP comply with the density Development Standards ranges of the PDA plan. Compliance with all the in PDA? development standards will be determined at FDP. Not enough information is available at this time to Are the design guidelines FDP in the PDA plan determine compliance with the design guidelines and addressed? detailed review is not required until submittal of the FDP. Are minimum parking FDP A detailed review of parking will be conducted at the time ratios in zoning ordinance of Final Development Plan. met? 1 Page 4 ATTACHMENT C Summary of Planning Commission Comments from February 25, 2016 Planning Commission Comment Response/Update Refer to Page 3 of Attachment A (Proposed Land Clarify proposed square footage breakdown Use Plan) for revised breakdown. Need some office space to support retail space PDP includes 50,000 SF of commercial space, which could include office uses. A minimum amount of retail is important for this PDP revised to include 120,000 SF designated for site commercial/retail uses Want to see more analysis of commercial space demand/potential Carry commercial further south on State Farm Drive Presented to City Council as part of PDA Plan on March 22, 2016. PDP revised to include groundfloor retail on State Farm Drive from Station Drive to Road #5. Move commercial closer to RPX with appropriate PDP revised to switch CN -2 and OS -2, bringing setbacks commercial closer to RPX, while maintaining setbacks. More commercial near new SMART platform PDP includes 50,000 SF designated for commercial uses just north of SMART platform. Move "park" off of RPX and potentially combine PDP revised to switch CN -2 and OS -2 to provide park/plaza along RPX continuation of OS -1 along RPX. f Workforce affordable housing and more density similar to PDA, taller buildings are desirable Removal of some redwoods is acceptable since some are not healthy Would like more connectivity; one pedestrian RPX crossing won't be enough Supports roundabout at RPX/State Farm Drive Would prefer more entrances from RPX to "bring people in" Phasing will be important Include renderings in the presentation Prefer the proposed small blocks, parking behind buildings, alleys Would like to see a central plaza, not at the intersection; similar to traditional square inside a grid Affordable housing is required and will be determined at Final Development Plan phase. Noted Noted and will be addressed at Final Development Plan phase. I Noted. Noted and will be addressed at Final Development Plan phase. Noted. Renderings are provided on pages 9-11 of the PDP and some will be incorporated in the presentation to the Commission. Noted. Noted. OS -3 could serve as this central plaza. To be determined at Final Development Plan phase 1 Planning Commission Comment Response/Update Do not like private streets The private streets will be publicly accessible, but privately maintained. Guiding principle should be "eyes on the street"; Noted. public realm to create safety and community Pedestrian access needs to be better, including Noted and will be addressed at Final internal circulation Development Plan phase. Noted. Would like to see more collaboration with bike/pedestrian coalitions Would like to see more on the parking and bike Noted and will be addressed at Final lane configurations for State Farm Drive Development Plan phase. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONCEPTUALLY APPROVING WITH RECOMMENDED REVISIONS THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE ROHNERT CROSSINGS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED SOUTH OF ROHNERT PARK EXPRESSWAY, EAST OF STATE FARM DRIVE, NORTH OF ENTERPRISE DRIVE, AND WEST OF SEED FARM DRIVE/FUTURE SMART PLATFORM IN SONOMA COUNTY, CA (APN 143-051-072) WHEREAS, the applicant, North Bay Communities LLC, filed Planning Application No. PLDV2015-0001 proposing a Preliminary Development Plan ("PDP"), for the Rohnert Crossings Planning Development, in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("RPMC"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners within an area exceeding a 300 foot radius of the subject property and a public hearing was published for a minimum of 10 days prior to the public hearing in the Community Voice; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2016 the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the park and recreation amenities in the PDP and recommended conceptual approval with modifications; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2016 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the Project; and WHEREAS, the public hearing was continued to allow the applicant to revise its PDP in light of concurrent amendments being made to applicable General and Specific Plan policies; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2016 the Planning Commission held a public hearing, continued from the February 25, 2016 hearing, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to the revised PDP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in Planning Application No. PLDV2015-0001, including recommended revisions proposed by staff to achieve consistency with city policies, as well as the information presented at the public hearings and the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission; and WHEREAS, the applicant is expected to use this non-binding review and conceptual approval of the PDP to submit a formal application for a Planned Development designation, which is subject to environmental analysis and public hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park hereby makes the following determinations and recommendations with respect to the proposed Preliminary Development Plan: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct, and material to this Resolution. Section 2. The Planning Commission recommends those revisions and updates provided for in Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, be made to the Preliminary Development Plan proposed by Planning Application No. PLDV2015-0001 to achieve full consistency with applicable City policies. Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that, subject to the recommended revisions in Section 2, Planning Application No. PLDV2015-0001 the Rohnert Crossings Preliminary Development Plan, including the proposed land uses and their interrelationships, is generally acceptable and consistent with the General Plan and the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT the Planning Commission does hereby conceptually approve Application No. PLDV2015-0001 the Rohnert Crossings Preliminary Development Plan as provided for in Exhibit A, subject to the recommended revisions described in Section 2 of this Resolution. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of April, 2016 by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ADAMS BLANQUIE BORBA GIUDICE HAYDON John Borba, Chairperson, City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Attest: Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A ROHNERT CROSSINGS PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SEE ATTACHMENT A ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT B ROHNERT CROSSINGS, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK, PDA PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE SEE ATTACHMENT B ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT INN -11 T PARK Planned Development - Preliminary Application `t0.xley.tl ''PP51"Project Sffe iotlega day ri Park rel B=bl 0 w -d— san MI ranrelpas Walwshed 1 11l Farallon W.nd5 OM gt A Ye�aAaa LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAP HARTIHOWERTON CJ2W HART IIOWI: R"I'OV 1.T0. © 2014 IIART IIOWI:RTON VARI NI:Il51.11) 'Ilii Jcsigiu aiiJ poi �cp::d,�w ii �,c ih� sole proy.ny of Hail Hn„�iiuii 'Ihe Jr.. Inge i gay ��o, he u.eJ cxccpc iih Herr H�,eci i�ii PROJECT DESCRIPTION Rohnert Crossings is a 32 acre mixed-use urban village proposed in the center of the city adjacent what will be the SMART station. The site is within the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan (PDA), and is intended to support the PDA vision of creating a more active central district. The plan proposes 70,000 sf of retail uses, designed to be the start of a new down- town, 50,000 sf of commercial uses, 250 townhomes and 150 multifamily dwell- ings. Rohnert Crossings will be connected to surrounding neighborhoods through an extensive network of streets and pedestrian paths, and contain 5.4 acres of parks and open spaces integrated into the blocks. In its design, Rohnert Crossings specifically addresses the following PDA objectives and supports the creation of a 'Downtown' by: • Creating higher -density mixed-use development within one half mile of the SMART train station; • Creating a new retail corridor along an established commercial street; • Providing pedestrian -oriented walkable blocks, compact building footprints, and plenty of community open space; • Creating a character that resonates with the community's existing assets by pro- posing tree -lined streets, generous open spaces, public amenities, and distinct resi- dential districts; • Providing a mix of housing options supporting a diversity of needs (800-1,600 sf 1-3 bd flats and Townhomes). We anticipate entitlement will include the following processes: 1. Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) Application Review of this application and subsequent hearings with Parks and Rec and Plan- ning Commission. 2. Final Development Plan (FDP) Application Application Review, General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and any applicable Use Permits. Public Hearings with Parks and Rec, Planning Commission and City Council. 3. EIR ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca SHEET INDEX PAGE (TITLE 0 Cover Sheet 1 ALTA Land Title Survey 2 Proposed Illustrative Site Plan 3 Proposed Land Use Plan 4 Proposed Parking Plan 5 Proposed Phasing Plan 6 Proposed Circulation Plan 7 Parks and Open Space Plans 8 Proposed State Farm Dr. Street Sections 9 Proposed State Farm Dr. Building Elevations 10 Renderings 11 Character Reference Imagery PROJECT DIRECTORY Applicant North Bay Communities, LLC 2392 Morse Ave. Irvine, CA 92614 (925) 980 9595 Contact: Michael Olson michaelolson5l@gmail.com Architecture, Planning & Landscape Architecture Hart Howerton One Union St. 3rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94588 (415) 439 2200 Main Contact: Chris Hall chall@harthowerton.com Surveyor Ruggeri - Jensen - Azar 4690 Chabot Drive, Suite 200 Pleasanton CA 94111 (925) 227 9100 Cover Sheeto pg April 20th, 2016 Padre City Golf Course Town Center Center 49 Potential Pedestrian z' + connection across RPEX Ro nert Park Expressway, - , f - `�1 � Raley's Town Center z It n,va 0 100 100 300 5100 F" r 700' I"= I00' ru ir11 siw (36x24'). Enterprise Dr. HART,HOWERTON GS2111411!Ul II NVI: W1' ON I'I' J, C]201411 AHI I I OW I'.N ION PAR IN I:RS I -I'I) !ILI_.I X11,1: I—PI IIll.- I,.r h, IHsi i[IJJ"evp��. �J „�� t, �.�-� •I Hair ,rte ice., VIP - Valle MART Village. LEGEND 1. RETAIL VILLAGE 2. COMMERCIAL 3. MIXED USE MULTIFAMILY / RETAIL 4. MULTIFAMILY 5. OPEN SPACE / COMMON AMENITY 6. TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL *A detailed description of proposed development program by block and use is described in the table on page 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Max Setbacks Height and Bulk Zone Bldg Type Units / Max Max Bldg Max Bldg acre Front Side Rear Height Coverage FAR CN Retail / Comm, NA 0' 0' 0' 35' 60% 1.2 MU Mixed Use 35 0' 0' 0' 55' 60% 2.5 (4) MF MultiFamily 35 0' 0' 0' 55' 60% 2.5 OS Open Space / NA 0' 0' 0' 25' 25% .25 Amenity(3) RH Residential 30 8' 5'(1) 3'(2) Townhomes 35' 60% 2.0 Notes: (1) Corner townhome conditions on side streets will have 5' setback from the ROW (2) 3' is measured to the edge of the access aisle, not a property line (3) These are common amenity facilities such as public restrooms, gazebos, clubhouses (4) FAR includes residential and commercial space in mixed use bldgs I ►r. L _ _ a CORP Yard* I! *Subject to Property Transfer_,` Alternate Plan (not including CORP Yard) RO H N E RT CROSSINGS Proposed Illustrative Site Plan 2 P PSI Rohnert Park, Ca April 20th, 2016 Padre Town Center Raley's Town Center City Center Rohnert Park Expressway -qqq OS -1 CN -2 nCN OS -3 19i1 l L? OS -4 OS-2 R Golf Course IOSS-8 SMART \ Road #1 OS -5 Enterprise r. 2 min. Walk 1/2 ac I.- ......••...•..••.••. 0 100 200 3.00....... i _ .i 500 700' I"= 100' at full size (36x24') 1/8 ac HART HOWE RTON 02014 HARI IIOW CRTONIAD 0201411ARTHOWRR)ON PARTNRRSLTI) Iliad,,ig.,a:,d—apes shown —,hesalep:op,,,y M H- H.,—,ni: n�dr.:. iiiga lay iwe b,-J—Wwilh,hecp,,—d—i u:ns,n,ofHanH-11L— r — —, 16 — _ m CORP Yard* *Subject to Property Transfer Valley Village ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BY PARCEL *M -U-1 parcel area tallied under Retail / Commercial section Proposed Land Use Plan P Pg 3 April 20th, 2016 Area Building Building Land Use (ac) Sub Area Area Units DU/ AC Retail / Commercial Area Bid. Area Units DU/ AC C -N-1 Neighborhood Com. 2.06 42,000 C -N-2 Neighborhood Com. 0.77 C -N-3 Neighborhood Com. 0.72 50,000 M -U-1 Neighborhood Com. 1.90 28,000 subtotal: 5.45 120,000 Multifamily Residential Area Bldg Area Units DU/ AC MF -1 2.83 125,000 90 32 M -U-1* 72,000 60 32 subtotal: 2.83 197,000 150 Residential R -H-1 Res. High Density 1 2.99 154,500 77 26 R -H-2 Res. High Density 2 0.72 37,500 19 26 R -H-3 Res. High Density 3 0.72 37,500 19 26 R -H-4 Res. High Density 4 0.78 40,500 20 26 R -H-5 Res. High Density 5 1.45 75,000 37 26 R -H-6 Res. High Density 6 1.15 59,500 30 26 R -H-7 Res. High Density 7 0.81 41,500 21 26 R -H-8 Res. High Density 8 1.06 54,000 27 26 subtotal: 9.68 500,000 250 26 Open Space and Recreational Districts Area Bld. Area 05-1 RPX Frontage Park - West 1.21 OS -2 RPX Frontage Park - East 1.08 OS -3 Central Park 0.31 1,000 OS -4 Main Street Park 0.69 OS -5 Enterprise Drive Park - West 0.51 OS -6 Enterprise Drive Park - Center 0.31 OS -7 Enterprise Drive Park - East 0.34 OS -8 SMART Station Park 0.48 1,000 OS -A-1 Amenity 1 0.22 1,500 OS -A-2 Amenity 2 0.08 OS -A-3 Amenity 3 0.22 1,500 subtotal: 5.44 5,000 TOTAL 822,000 400 Streets Area Bid. Area S-1 Project Area ROW 8.56 *M -U-1 parcel area tallied under Retail / Commercial section Proposed Land Use Plan P Pg 3 April 20th, 2016 Padre City Golf Course Town Center Center Rohnert Park Expressway j 'arrtltlUix"` r PARKING SUMMARY Use # State Farm Drive 162 Surface Lots (Commercial) 140 Surface Lots (Residential) 190 - Street Parking (Internal)*** 400 r Townhomes 500 +� TOTAL 1392 }a wN. ar, r \10010' 1k TART f f;+ Raley s t _ ea . �► Town Center`, 44 '00000 ► �Raacl #1 ri -.Enterprise Dr. 2 min. Walk e a 0 100 200 300 500 700' 111 = 1001 di fid 1 size `36 x 24") 1/8 ac HART HOWE RTON 0201411ARTHOWCRIONLID 02014IIARTIIOWI:RTONI'ARINLRSIID the Jeaipi -J mI repl. zh.—arc the yule prupeny M Hen H.—m— The dra mp may -, he used e. ceps with the exp,,—d wrnecn cnu.e0e aI Han H.--, Valley Village ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca PARKING BY USE Use SF of Units Retail * 70,000 Commercial * 50,000 Multifamily ** 150 Townhomes (2 per unit) 250 Guest Parking (1 per 4 units) -- - Unallocated street parking TOTAL Required Proposed 280 280 200 200 300 300 500 500 100 100 12 - 1,380 1,392 * Some of these provided on adjacent street parking ** 110 of these will be provided on street (directly adjacent) *** Anticipated stormwater system may replace portions of this 4 Proposed Parking Plan pg April 20th, 2016 Padre City Golf Course Town Center Center � -- ; �', � k ppY 7;Rohnert Park- Ex resswa - ec .t 6 Town Center: 0 100 200 300 500 700' I"= 100' a1 llil,size(36x24) :.��� ' � 4 HART HOWP RTON © 2014 HART IIOWERTON LTO ® 2014 HARI HOWCRTON PARTNERS 171) the Jcsig, .W col ccpls shoo n am the mle prapcny nl Han H.—,—. The c,p—.d wda. --o , o1 Hare H--... N yyy _ S'l"I+�V-7, RT - Valley :. - -.:- Village . LLyi - a Ap y� ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca PROPOSED PHASING Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 r "" 7 L . .. m CORP Yard* *Subject to Property Transfer Proposed Phasing pg 5 April 20th, 2016 Padre Town Center Raley's Town Center 2 min. Walk J 0 100 200 300 1° = 100' atfull size (36x 24) HART IHOWERTON C 1. 500 City Center Potential Pedestrian q, connection across RPEX Rohnert Park Expressway Enterprise Dr. ]/2 ac 700" 1/8 ac 0201411 ARI IIOWER ION 1:1n 0 2014 11 ARFHOWI'RI ON PAN I HERS 1-11) Ih� d'.6gil,: d -,- ,I, sI ale pinpeiiy ,I H,,. Ih, d, ",mg, i."Y I"'—de.,—P, "ilh ih, -p —d wriiiui cuiucii[ of Hey. Hu........ Golf Course Multi Use Path (PDA) (Outside of Project) Valley Village ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca LEGEND �. ! Public 2 - Way j Private 2 - Way � ■s. � Private Alley Dedicated Pedestrian Paths No vehicular access through to SMART parking Potential Bus Routes r 7 L a CORP Yard* *Subject to Property Transfer R/R Right -In Right -Out Notes: 1. All public and private roads to have pedestrian sidewalks on both sides 2. 'Pedestrian Paths' notes dedicated routes for pedestrians through the site and connecting to surrounding off-site networks 15' 40' 15' (A -A) Typ Commercial Street Section - 70 ROW 10' 36' 10' (B -B) Typ Res Street Section - 60 ROW ,�+ Circulation Plan Pg V April 20th, 2016 Y./- iNeigndornooci mini -ram r.o iNeignoornooa riaza HART HOWE RTON 0201411 ANI IIOV'I.N1 ON ITO U 2111411 A Ii 111 OW I: RFON I'AI I II1351 I I) Ili,J.sp,iii,l coiu,lxs.d.u..iia«1h. rule Nrnl.......l Fian H,�neil��,� M,J�ewing,in.li.elL. uuJ erc.N�iriih lh,,p,,,,,,J PA Neighborhood Mini -Park ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca fir+ Key Plan LEGEND ] Event Lawn 2 Picnic Area 3 Play Structure 4 Existing Trees (typ.) S Proposed Trees (typ.) 6 Sculpture / Art Feature 7 Bocce Court 8 Outdoor Seating 9 Kiosk, Clock Tower, Public Restroom 10 Outdoor Chess Boards 11 Gazebo 0 30 60' 1" = 30' at full size P� Space Proposed Parks and Open S 7 P P P April 20th, 2016 I 86' 1 Section 1 - State Farm south of RP Expressway Section 2 - St; 12'; 15' 13'1 15' 1 12' 16' ! 12' b1 1 15' 13'15" 1 112' k SDWK' 10KE . PKNG PK LANE 'URN LANE NG M BIKIlii 111'1 86' Section 3 - State Farm north of Enterprise Dr. i -4 1 - HART H O W h R T O N RO H N E RT CROSSINGS Proposed State Farm Dr. Street Sections P Pg 8 0201411AR1 IL -111111 I ON 11-11 U 4]201411ART IIOWIH.—..TON PAR"fNP.RS l:TD Rohnert Park Ca April 20th, 2016 Th.- Jcsigiis aiiJ coiic<pis .d�uN ii arc the sole yrnpcny of Hail H,�xniui. "I7�: Ji.nvi�ig� inial iioi he uxJ crc�pc wiili ,h.� c.PrcucJ wriucii i.1uscin nl Hari Ha.vci l�,ii � u Elevation 1 - Proposed Retail Buildings fronting on State Farm Elevation 2 - Proposed Mixed-USe Buildings fronting on Station Dr. 0 Qt` r CCII 77 1 { ._.,t ._._ - t J , HART H O W E R T O N RO H N E RT CROSSINGS Retail and Mixed -Use Example Elevations p pg 9 CJ2111—p—, IIOW p -1........ V IIU 02n p,.V Rl iH—'R"IOV.. [ NI--.Rmg— Rohnert Park Ca April 20th 2016 the Jeaigiis aiiJ ......prs shown are the sole proNeny nl Ha.r H.muron the Jrn iirga i i�} i ui be—d erecyr wilh nc� crNrc:ceJ wnuui <<�ii.cnr ul H.�r Huwuroi� ) y SMART train station - looking south over Seed Farm Square 'Main St' looking towards north *images for reference only - actual designs may vary. Main St- looking south down existing State Farm HARTHOW$RTON 0 2014 11 Alt] 11()\C'HRION 111) 02111411 Alit HOW I. It ION PAR I.VI IRS I I D. I I.. . 1,43-,—h-, — 11, +,:I���.nyci , .,I Hili H"', 1'..1..... ...1 .1 I...........F....... 14..� Station Drive looking towards SMART train ROHNERT CROSSINGS Rohnert Park, Ca Keyplan Renderings g pg 10 April 20th, 2016 t A J �' � ~ "r ''�• - r • ,J� as "�...�_ '- �� '!� ,.�' �' 3 `r 1 ry1 k •�r ® --.,i�g�,q�f It s Y- e '72EFzi E�A - WWW'V, Ago, • r7 a • j ,.. � � tib-' �-� ' ' s R SRI i j �� � � ' ■ 1. _ � � 1 � 'F` . �ly�.,i ,�Sil � �--�,`�;F�.1,r . � _ .. ,� -�. _ =ter PIP - - - ! ... "� `, - 'is�:tp l J C'''am'+ ■!���. IE t w w iw '• p _ P r , C _ - ; » City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Report DATE: April 28, 2016 ITEM NO: 8.3 SUBJECT: PLGP2016-0002/PLZR2016-0002 — General Plan Amendment and Rezone from Public Institutional to High Density Residential LOCATION: 435 Southwest Boulevard, Rohnert Park, CA (APN 143-370-010) REQUEST: Recommend to the City Council adoptionof a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment and Rezone from Public Institutional to High Density Residential APPLICANT: City of Rohnert Park Background This 0.73 acre property at 435 Southwest Boulevard was formerly a Public Safety fire station. The fire station was demolished and the city is offering the undeveloped property for sale. The current zoning and General Plan designation is P -I Public Institutional. The P -I zoning district is for public institutional uses such as a fire station, public school or park. It is not a zoning designation that would normally apply to private development. The city is therefore proposing amending the General Plan to Residential High Density and rezoning the property R -H Residential High Density. A Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposal. There were no potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation. The Negative Declaration was circulated for the required twenty (20) day review period and no comments have been received. Page 1 Piro iect Description This former fire station site is presently vacant. The property is surrounded with a six (6) foot high chain link fence and the surface treatment is old asphalt left over from the fire house and annual grass. The surrounding properties are developed as follows: • To the east is a city park and Technical Middle School. This property is zoned Public Institutional. To the south, is a church with access from Boris Court. This site is zoned R -H Residential High Density. • To the west is an apartment complex on R -H zoned land. Access is from Boris Court. • To the north across Southwest Boulevard are single-family homes fronting on Alta Avenue and backing up to Southwest Boulevard. They are zoned R -L Low Density Residential Single Family. Based on the surrounding land uses on Southwest Boulevard and Boris Court, an appropriate use for the property is high density residential. With a lot area of approximately 31,800 square feet, the maximum number of units under the R -H zoning would be 18. However, the maximum number would probably be less based on the size of the units, parking, setbacks and open space requirements. Building an apartment complex on this property will have minimum impact on adjacent properties. Access is from Southwest Boulevard and there is no access or impact to Boris Court. There are no windows on the adjacent apartment building facing the subject property. Therefore; development on the property will not block adjacent resident's views. The development will also have little or no impact on the adjacent park and school. Development on the property will be visible from the rear of the homes that front on Alta Avenue and back up to Southwest Boulevard. Any development on the site will require Site Plan and Architectural Review approval by the Planning Commission. At that time, staff can work with the developer to protect the privacy of the residents who live on Alta Avenue in the vicinity of the property. In addition to multi -family residential development, the following uses are permitted in the R -H zoning district subject to conditional use permit approval: • Bed and Breakfast Inn • Day Care Center • Day Care Home for 9 or more persons Page 2 • Family Care Home • Community Care Facility • Mobile Home Park • Private School Religious Assembly • Residential Care Facility The following are policies in the Housing Element supporting the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning: • HO -1.1 Residential Zoned Land The City shall continue to provide an adequate supply of residentially zoned land at sufficient densities to accommodate its fair share of the existing and future housing needs. • HO -2.1 Housing Density The City shall promote a diversity of housing types, including single-family detached and attached residences, mobile homes, multifamily rental and ownership units, second units and units combined with non-residential uses. Staff Analysis This former fire station site is located in a multi -family residential area surrounded by apartments, a church and a park and school. The most appropriate and logical zoning of the property is R -H High Density Residential. Residential development of the property will be compatible with surrounding uses. The amendment to the General Plan for High Density Residential is consistent with Housing Element policies to multi -family housing. Rohnert Park and the surrounding area has a very low vacancy rate in multi -family housing. New multi -family development will help mitigate the shortage of apartment units. Any development on the property will require Site Plan and Architectural Review approval by the Planning Commission. Conditions can be attached to any approval to protect surrounding properties. Environmental Determination A Negative Declaration was prepared for this proposal and circulated for a twenty (20) day review period. There were no potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation. Page 3 Findinus The recommended findings to approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning are included in the attached resolution. Public Notification This item has been duly noticed by publication in the Community Voice for the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment and Rezoning and posted at the prescribed locations in Rohnert Park. Property owners within 300 feet of the project were mailed notices of the proposed application. Staff Recommendation Based on the analysis and findings of this report and the attached resolution, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by motion, adopt Resolutions No. 2016-12, No. 2016-13 and No. 2016-14 recommending to the City Council adoption of the Negative Declaration and approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning to High Density Residential. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 2016-12 Recommending Approval to the City Council of the Negative Declarartion 2. Resolution No. 2016-13 Recommending to the City Council Amendment of the General Plan 3. Resolution No. 2016-14 Recommending to the City Council Rezoning of 435 Southwest Boulevard from P -I Public Institutional to R -H High Density Residential 4. Aerial Photo of Project Site Normin W%cisbrod, Technics 1 Advisor U, I` A "/ Jet, eisweng , Planning Manager Page 4 q-), � -/ C Date f �. Dae PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING AMENDMENT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 435 SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD (APN 143-370-010) WHEREAS, the applicant, City of Rohnert Park, has submitted a plan for the property located at 435 Southwest Boulevard for rezoning from Public Institutional to R -H Residential High Density (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared for the Project and concluded that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore a Negative Declaration was prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law, the Negative Declaration were circulated for a period of 20 days and a Notice of Intent was published in the Community Voice on April 8, 2016 for the 20 day review period to April 28, 2016; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code (RPMC), a public hearing notice was published in the Community Voice for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public meeting at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify regarding the Initial Study and Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, at the April 28, 2016 public meeting, the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the proposal, which is attached to this resolution as Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, Section 21000, et. seq., of the Public Resources Code and Section 15000, et. seq., of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (the "CEQA Guidelines"), which govern the preparation, content, and processing of Negative Declarations, have been fully met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park makes the following findings, determinations and recommendations with respect to the Negative Declaration for the proposed Project: 1. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the Negative Declaration and all written documentation and public comments prior to making recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Project; and 2. An Initial Study was prepared for the project, and on the basis of substantial evidence in the whole record, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, therefore a Negative Declaration has been prepared which reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. 3. The Negative Declaration was prepared, publicized, circulated, and reviewed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and 4. The Negative Declaration constitutes an adequate, accurate, objective, and complete Negative Declaration in compliance with all legal standards; and 5. The documents and other materials, including without limitation staff reports, memoranda, maps, letters and minutes of all relevant meetings, which constitute the administrative record of proceedings upon which the Commission's resolution is based are located at the City of Rohnert Park, City Clerk, 130 Avram Ave., Rohnert Park, CA 94928. The custodian of records is the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park that approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects on the environment and the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that City Council approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and Initial Study set forth in Exhibit 1 and direct the filing of a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk; and DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of April, 2016 by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT ADAMS BLANQUIE BORBA ABSTAIN: GIUDICE HAYDON John Borba, Chairperson, City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Attest: Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary Proposed NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Rohnert Park has prepared an Initial Study to determine whether the following project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. On the basis of that study, the City of Rohnert Park finds that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Thus, the City proposes to adopt this Negative Declaration. PROJECT TITLE: City of Rohnert Park General Plan Amendment and Rezoning for former Public Safety Site LEAD AGENCY: CONTACT: City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928-3126 Norman Weisbrod Technical Advisor City of Rohnert Park, (707) 588-2219 nweishrod argcity.org PROJECT LOCATION: 435 Southwest Boulevard (APN143-370-010) Southside of Southwest Boulevard easterly of Boris Court and west of a city park and middle school. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject property was formerly a fire station. The fire station was demolished and the property is presently vacant land. The property is surrounded by an apartment building on the west, a church on the south and Technical Middle School, and a city park on the east. The proposal is to rezone the property to R -H High Density Residential. This will require an amendment to the General Plan from Public Institutional to High Density Residential and the rezoning from Public Institutional to High Density Residential. PROJECT TITLE: LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: FORMER PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY INITIAL STUDY City of Rohnert Park General Plan Amendment and Rezoning for former Public Safety Site City of Rohnert Park Development Services 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928-2486 Norman Weisbrod Technical Advisor (707) 588-2219 PROJECT LOCATION: 435 Southwest Boulevard PROJECT APPLICANT GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: Rohnert Park, CA Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 143-370-010 City of Rohnert Park 30 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928-2486 Public Institutional Public -Institutional EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant land PROJECT SUMMARY: The subject property was formerly a fire station. The fire station was demolished and the property is presently vacant land. The property is surrounded by an apartment building on the west, a church on the south and Technical Middle School, and a city park on the east. The proposal is to rezone the property to R -H High Density Residential. This will require an amendment to the General Plan from Public Institutional to High Density Residential and the rezoning from Public Institutional to High Density Residential. 2 19 Q,©f1NERT PAR ALIF0RNtf 62 INITIAL STUDY & NEGATIVE DECLARATION BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: City of Rohnert Park General Plan Amendment and Rezoning for former Public Safety Site 2 3. If 0 7 Lead Agency Name and Address: Contact Person and Phone Number: City of Rohnert Park Development Services 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Norman Weisbrod Technical Advisor City of Rohnert Park 707.588.2219 Project Location: 435 Southwest Boulevard (APN143-370-010) Southside of Southwest Boulevard easterly of Boris Court and west of Technical Middle School. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Rohnert Park, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928 General Plan Designation: Public/Institutional Zoning: P -I Public Institutional 8. Project Description Summary: The subject property was formerly a fire station. The fire station was demolished and the property is presently vacant land. The property is surrounded by an apartment building on the west, a church on the south and Technical Middle School, and a city park on the east. The proposal is to rezone the property to R - H High Density Residential. This will require an amendment to the General Plan from Public Institutional to High Density Residential and the rezoning from Public Institutional to High Density Residential. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Biological Resources 11 Greenhouse Gases ❑ Agriculture ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Geology/Soils 11 Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture ❑ Air Quality ❑ Land Use & Planning ❑ Population & Housing ❑ Transportation & Circulation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial study: ❑ Energy & Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance X I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT has a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier General Plan EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier General Plan EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(1), the City of Rohnert Park, as lead agency for the proposed project, has prepared an initial study to make the following findings: 1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the proposed activity is adequately described and is within the scope of the General Plan EIR. 2. There is no substantial evidence before the lead agency that the subsequent project may have a significant effect on the environment. 3. The analyses of cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment contained in the General Plan EIR are adequate for this subsequent project. 5 4. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21157.6(a), having reviewed the General Plan EIR, the City of Rohnert Park finds and determines that: Signature a. no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan EIR was certified, and b. that there is no new available information which was not and could not have been known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. April 7, 2016 Date Norman Weisbrod, Technical Advisor Printed Name For: City of Rohnert Park - 2 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION The subject property was formerly used as a City fire station. The fire station was demolished and the property is vacant. The proposal is to rezone the property from P -I Public Institutional to R -H High Density Residential. 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property was formerly used as a fire station. The fire station was demolished several years ago and the site is vacant. The proposal is to rezone the property to R -H High Density Residential which is the zoning designation of the surrounding properties. The zoning change requires an amendment to the General Plan from Public Institutional designation to High Density Residential and rezoning from P -I Public -Institutional to R -H High Density Residential. R Aerial of Subject Property 4 DISCRETIONARY ACTION Implementation of the proposed project would require the following discretionary actions by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission: 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following section adapts and completes the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project. For this checklist, the following designations are used: Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared. Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to reduce the impact to a less -than -significant level. Less -Than -Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under CEQA relative to existing standards. No Impact: The project would not have any impact. I. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect ❑ on a scenic vista? x b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock _ outcroppings, and historic x buildings within a State scenic highway? i d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ 11 ❑ x views in the area? a -d. This project does not include a specific building but could result in an apartment building and other land use described in the R -H District.. The project is a change in General Plan designation for the site from Public Institutional to High Density Residential and rezoning from Public Institutional to High Density Residential. The property is surrounded on the west by an apartment building, on the south by a church and on the east by a middle school and a city park. To the north to the north across Southwest Boulevard are the rear yards of single-family homes fronting on Alta Avenue. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project. Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Potentially Significant Less -Than - Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Significant With Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact c. Substantially degrade the existing [] ❑ ❑ X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ ❑ X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ 11 ❑ x views in the area? a -d. This project does not include a specific building but could result in an apartment building and other land use described in the R -H District.. The project is a change in General Plan designation for the site from Public Institutional to High Density Residential and rezoning from Public Institutional to High Density Residential. The property is surrounded on the west by an apartment building, on the south by a church and on the east by a middle school and a city park. To the north to the north across Southwest Boulevard are the rear yards of single-family homes fronting on Alta Avenue. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project. Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the [] ❑ ❑ X Farmland Mapping Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ X contract? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their El E]location x or nature, could individually or cumulativelv result in loss of 0 Potentially Potentially Significant With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Farmland to non-agricultural use? a -c The subject property is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by urban uses with no known agricultural use. III. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project. Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant Impact No Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ ❑ i x air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an ❑ ❑ existing or projected air quality x violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or C] ❑ x 11 State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ x concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ x people? a. -e.: During construction of future improvements on the site, the contractor will have to conform to emission control strategies that control dust and exhaust emissions in conformance with the city 10 standards. The change in use of the site from Public Institutional to High Density Residential will result in an increase in traffic generation. High Density Residential use generate substantially more vehicle trips than a public safety facility (fire station). The proposed change in the General Plan designation from Public Institutional to High Density Residential will result in an increase in vehicular trips. As described in Section I.2 of the BAAQMD 2010 CEQA Guidelines, thresholds of Significance, "by its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. A project with emissions that are below the thresholds of significance would not make a considerable contribution to any cumulative impacts. The proposed project would have emissions that are below the applicable thresholds of significant; therefore, the project would make a less than significant contribution to cumulative air quality impacts. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional E ❑ x plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not ® ❑ x limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ x migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree 0 ❑ ❑ x preservation policy or ordinance? 11 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or D ❑ ❑ x regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional E ❑ x plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not ® ❑ x limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ x migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree 0 ❑ ❑ x preservation policy or ordinance? 11 a. — f.: The subject property does not provide the habitat for any riparian habitat or sensitive natural community. The property is a previously developed site (former fire station) and is currently undeveloped with no trees or other substantial vegetation. It is a weed free dirt and partially paved surface. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Issues Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Potentially a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the Potentiall Significant Less - ❑ x y With Than- b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural [_I J x geologic features? Conservation Community Plan, or other ❑ ❑ © x approved local, regional, or State habitat those interred outside of formal FJ ❑ x conservation plan? a. -f.: There are no known cultural resources on a. — f.: The subject property does not provide the habitat for any riparian habitat or sensitive natural community. The property is a previously developed site (former fire station) and is currently undeveloped with no trees or other substantial vegetation. It is a weed free dirt and partially paved surface. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Issues Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ❑ x defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological IJ ❑ x resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource on site or unique ❑ [_I J x geologic features? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal FJ ❑ x cemeteries? a. -f.: There are no known cultural resources on the site and none were recovered when the former fire station was demolished. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: 12 Issues Potentiall y Significan t Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less - Than- Significan No t Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map ❑ ® issued by the State Geologist for the area X based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 13 ❑ X iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Ll ❑ ❑ X iv. Landslides? F1 El ❑ x b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ® ❑ X of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in ❑ ❑ 11 x on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? e. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in ❑ ❑ ❑ X Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building Code? f. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ x where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a. The project site could be subject to violent ground shaking from a major seismic event on the Healdsburg-Rodgers Creek fault. However, because the project sit is not underlain by known traces of any potential active fault, fault -line surface rupture would not be a hazard within the project site. Impacts related to fault rupture potential would be less than significant. There are no slopes steeper than one percent and the impact from landslides would be less than significant. b.,c., d. An acceptable degree of soil stability can be achieved by the required incorporation of soil treatment programs in the excavation and construction plans to address site-specific soil conditions. e. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed and the project would have no impact related to these types of wastewater disposal. 13 VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS' Would the project: a -b. The additional automobile use resulting from development on this site as high density residential may result in a less than significant increase in Green House Gas. Legislative Context California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) In September 2006, the Governor signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et. seq.). The Act codifies the executive order for reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This change, which is estimated to be a 25 to 35 percent reduction from current emission levels, will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that was phased in starting in 2012. SB 375 On September 30, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill (SB) 375 into law. This legislation links transportation and land use planning with the CEQA process to help achieve the GHG emission reduction targets set by AB 32. Even before the passage of AB32 and S13375, the City of Rohnert Park initiated actions to reduce GHG emissions and become more sustainable overall. These actions include: • California 2010 Building Code • Energy Efficiency Ordinance 2007-779. This ordinance also established Title 14- Sustainabilty, in the Municipal Code (March 2007) 14 Potentially Potentiall Significant y With Less-Than- Significan Mitigation Significant No Issues t Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a L-1 x _I significant impact on the atmosphere? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of _i x greenhouse gases? a -b. The additional automobile use resulting from development on this site as high density residential may result in a less than significant increase in Green House Gas. Legislative Context California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) In September 2006, the Governor signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et. seq.). The Act codifies the executive order for reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This change, which is estimated to be a 25 to 35 percent reduction from current emission levels, will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that was phased in starting in 2012. SB 375 On September 30, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill (SB) 375 into law. This legislation links transportation and land use planning with the CEQA process to help achieve the GHG emission reduction targets set by AB 32. Even before the passage of AB32 and S13375, the City of Rohnert Park initiated actions to reduce GHG emissions and become more sustainable overall. These actions include: • California 2010 Building Code • Energy Efficiency Ordinance 2007-779. This ordinance also established Title 14- Sustainabilty, in the Municipal Code (March 2007) 14 • City Council adopted resolution 2004-111, which set a goal for GHG reductions of 20 percent by the year 2010 for internal City operations (baseline year 2000) (May 2004) * City Council adopted resolution 2005-233, which sets a goal of green house gas reductions of 25 percent by the year 2015 for community -wide use, private and public (baseline year 1990) (July 2005) • The project would exceed Title 24 energy efficiency requirements by 15 percent, consistent with CALGreen Tier 1 requirements, as required by the City of Rohnert Park. • The project would achieve a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use, consistent with CALGreen Tier 1 requirements. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or 0 x waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a i i X result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a, plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X public use airport, would the project result in a �- safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 15 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, X or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the Cl x likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or 0 x waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a i i X result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a, plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X public use airport, would the project result in a �- safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 15 h. Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to Q d ! x urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a. -h.: The proposed Project would not create hazards to the public regarding hazardous materials, substances or waste. The Project site is not on any list of hazardous material sites and the Project site is not in the vicinity of a public or private airport. There is no potential on the Project site for wildland fires. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Issues Potentiall y Significan t Impact Potentially Less - Than- Significan No t Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste Potentiall Significant Less - discharge requirements? y With Than- b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or Signifccan Mitigation Signifccan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety ❑ © hazard for people residing or working in the ❑ ❑ X project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response ❑ X plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to Q d ! x urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a. -h.: The proposed Project would not create hazards to the public regarding hazardous materials, substances or waste. The Project site is not on any list of hazardous material sites and the Project site is not in the vicinity of a public or private airport. There is no potential on the Project site for wildland fires. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Issues Potentiall y Significan t Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less - Than- Significan No t Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste 0 �" X discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production ❑ ❑ ❑ x rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 16 Issues Potentially Potentiall Significant y With Significan Mitigation t Impact Incorporated Less - Than- Significan No t Impact Impact c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a CI CI ❑ x manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ ❑ substantially increase the rate or amount of x surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide ❑ ❑ 13 x substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ x g. Place housing within a 100 -year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or ❑ ❑ ❑ Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood x hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures ❑ ❑ ❑ which would impede or redirect flood flows? x i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, ❑ ❑ ❑ including flooding as a result of the failure of a x levee or dam. j. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving inundation by ❑ ❑ ❑ x seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? a. j.: When the subject property develops, there will be adequate capacity for sewage disposal and collection and dispersal of storm water. Development of the site with buildings will reduce groundwater recharge but not to the extent that it would impact any nearby wells. This property is not within the 100 -year floodplain. There is no risk of flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam and people or structures on the site will not be subject to inundation by a seiche, tsunami or mudflow. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: 17 Issues Potentiall y Significan t Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less - Than- Significan No t Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ n x b. Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local ❑ ❑ ❑ x coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating on environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community's ❑ ❑ ❑ x conservation plan? a. -c.: This proposal to change the land use on the project site will not physically divide an established community. Surrounding properties adjacent to the subject site are zoned and developed with high density apartments. The adjacent church and public school are permitted uses in the surrounding residential area. There are no habitat conservations plans or community conservation plans applying to this property. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the ❑ ❑ ❑ x region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site ❑ ❑ ❑ x delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? a. -b.: There are no known mineral resources on the subject property and the site is not delineated on the General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. XII. NOISE Would the project result in: Issues Potential ly Significa nt Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less- Than- Significan No t Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise Significant Less - y levels in excess of standards established in the ❑ ❑ L_.! Mitigation local general plan or noise ordinance, or Issues t Impact x t Impact Impact applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., p excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne ❑ C.1 ❑ x noise levels? extension of major infrastructure)? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels ❑ ❑ !❑ x existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above ❑ ❑ F1 x levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑ ❑ x airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ ❑ x residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a. -f.: There was some noise impact from previous Public Safety vehicles leaving the site in response to an emergency situation. The use of the property for high density residential will result in some noise from traffic but will not increase the ambient noise level. Noise impacts will be less than the noise impacts from a fire station. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: 19 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Signiftcan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., p ❑ ❑ x through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? 19 a. -c.: Rezoning the property to multi -family residential will in itself induce population growth However, the population growth will not be substantial because of the low number of units that can be accommodated on the site. It will also be compatible with the surrounding apartment development. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - Less - y With Than- With Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact b. Displace substantial numbers of existing t Impact Incorporated t Impact housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ C L x replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ b. Police protection? ❑ c. Displace substantial numbers of people, x ❑ c. Schools? necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ 1.1 ❑ x housing elsewhere? ❑ Cl x a. -c.: Rezoning the property to multi -family residential will in itself induce population growth However, the population growth will not be substantial because of the low number of units that can be accommodated on the site. It will also be compatible with the surrounding apartment development. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. -d.: There is adequate police and fire protection services to serve this site when it is developed with multi -family residential use. There is an adjacent middle school and recreation facilities that can be used on a daily basis by the residents of multi -family development on the site. XV. RECREATION Would the project. 20 Potentially Polentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Fire protection? ❑ L1 x ❑ b. Police protection? ❑ ❑ x ❑ c. Schools? ❑ ❑ x ❑ d. Parks? ❑ Cl x ❑ a. -d.: There is adequate police and fire protection services to serve this site when it is developed with multi -family residential use. There is an adjacent middle school and recreation facilities that can be used on a daily basis by the residents of multi -family development on the site. XV. RECREATION Would the project. 20 21 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial [ .i x physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an 0 [] ❑ X adverse physical effect on the environment? a.b.: The project may result in a minor increase in park use in Rohnert Park. Because of the limited number of units that can be developed on the site this will have no impact on existing parks within the city. XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Would the project: Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a ❑ x f substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the ❑ X county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a n ❑ © change in location that results in substantial X safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ ❑ X intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? LJ ❑ ❑ x f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ x 21 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) 11 ❑ ❑ x a. -L Changing the General Plan and Zoning Code designation of the site from Public Institutional to High Density Residential will result in an increase in traffic generation. The property could be developed with a maximum of 18 units. A conservative estimate of 7 trips per day per unit would result in 119 trips per day from a multi -family development. The estimate for the previous use as a fire station was 25 trips per day. Southwest Boulevard is a collector street and operates at a Level of Service (LOS) C or better. The city's standard for traffic flow is LOS C or better. With an additional 94 trips per day (119 trips minus previous 25 trips equals 94) Southwest Boulevard will still operate at a LOS C or better and the rezoning will not have a substantial impact on traffic. Apartment development on the site will have to comply with the city's parking requirement for multi -family development. There are bike lanes on Southwest Boulevard for bicycle transportation. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of ❑ 13 ❑ x existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and I I ❑ ❑ x resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 22 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control 1] ❑ ❑ x Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction ❑ ❑ ❑ x of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of ❑ 13 ❑ x existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and I I ❑ ❑ x resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 22 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No Issues t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve 0 ❑ ❑ x the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid ❑ ❑ CI x waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ❑— x a. -b: There are adequate utility and service systems in place to accommodate multi -family development. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Issues a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 23 Potentially Potentiall Significant Less - y With Than- Significan Mitigation Significan No t Impact Incorporated t Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ x ❑ ❑ ❑ x 11 ❑ ❑ x ❑ ❑ CI x a. -d.: The proposed project will not degrade the quality of the environment, will not impact fish or wildlife and does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 24 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM FOR LAND USE OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PROJECT SITE FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, the applicant, the City of Rohnert Park, has filed Planning Application No. PLGP2016-0002 proposing a General Plan Amendment in connection with a proposed amendment to the land use designation for a 0.73 acre site (APN: 143-370-010) located at 435 Southwest Boulevard, in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("RPMC"); and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the General Plan Diagram (General Plan Figure 2.2-1) would change the 0.73 -acre site at 435 southwest Boulevard from its current designation of Public Institutional to High Density Residential. The proposed General Plan Amendment is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, the City has assessed the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project and has prepared a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Negative Declaration prepared for the Project; recommended its adoption by the City Council; 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 a three hundred foot radius of the subject property and a public hearing notice was published in the Community Voice for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support of or opposition to the proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the General Plan Amendment application for the proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park makes the following findings, determinations and recommendations with respect to the proposed General Plan Amendment: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. The Planning Commission recommends City Council adoption of the Negative Declaration for this Project, as described in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015- 12, approved on April 28, 2016 concurrently with the Planning Commission's approval of this Resolution. Section 3. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings concerning the General Plan amendment proposed by Planning Application No. PLGP2016-0002: 1. That the proposed site is appropriate for development under the General Plan's High Density Residential Land Use Designation. Criteria Satisfied. The proposed amendment to the General Plan Diagram would change the land use designation of the 0.73 site fronting Southwest Boulevard from Public Institutional to Residential High Density. The proposed General Plan Amendment would be consistent with these surrounding High Density Residential uses, the church to the rear of the site and the adjacent park and school. 2. That the proposed amendment will not result in an internal inconsistency in the General Plan. Criteria Satisfied. The General Plan must be internally consistent. This proposed General Plan Amendment will allow High Density Residential development in an area that is developed with similar uses. There are also adequate City services to serve future High Density Residential development on the property. The General Plan Amendment is in harmony with the General Plan policies and standards 3. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public testimony regarding the proposed amendments to the General Plan. Criteria Satisfied. A duly noticed public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was held on April 28, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Findings stated hereinabove and approve Application No. PLGP2016-0002 and amend the General Plan Land Use Diagram so as to conform with the General Plan Amendment recommended herein by adopting the amended General Plan Land Use Diagram attached to this Resolution as Exhibit 1. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of April, 2016 by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ADAMS BLANQUIE BORBA GIUDICE HAYDON John Borba, Chairperson, City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Attest: _ Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary EXHIBIT 1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM FIGURE 2.3-1 JOHN REED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ALICIA PARK 435 Southwest Blvd f f Rural Estate Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Industrial Commercial - N -410 V MOUNTAIN SHADOWS MIDDLE SCHOOL BENICIA PARK WALDO-ROHNERT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL r Mixed Use Office Public/ Institutional Parks/Recreation Open Space - Environmental Conservation Open Space - Agriculture and Resource Management Attachment: 500 750 1,000 ft 0 250 Mixed Use Office Public/ Institutional Parks/Recreation Open Space - Environmental Conservation Open Space - Agriculture and Resource Management Attachment: 500 750 1,000 ft PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REZONING OF 435 SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD FROM P -I PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL TO R -H RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY AND AMENDING THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ZONING MAP WHEREAS, the applicant, City of Rohnert Park, filed Planning Application No. PLZR2016-0002 proposing to rezone a 0.73 acre project site located at 435 Southwest Boulevard (the Project) (APN 143-370-010), in accordance with the City of Rohnert Park Municipal Code ("RPMC"); and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the rezoning of the 0.73 acre project site from P -I to R - H, the Project proposes that the City Zoning Map be amended for the 0.73 acre project site as a R - H zoned area, as provided in the Proposed Zoning Map Revision attached to this Resolution as Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Negative Declaration prepared for the Project; recommended its certification by the City Council; 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 in the Community Voice for a minimum of 10 days prior to the first public hearing; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2016, 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 PLZR2016-0002 for the proposed rezoning of property; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park makes the following findings, determinations and recommendations with respect to the proposed rezoning of property and the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map; Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. The Planning Commission has recommended City Council approval of the Negative Declaration for this Project as described in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016- 12, approved on April 28, 2016 concurrently with the Planning Commission's approval of this Resolution. Section 3. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings concerning the rezoning of property and amendment to City Zoning Map proposed by Planning Application No. PLZR2016-0002: 1. That the proposed zoning and/or amendment is consistent with the General Plan. Criteria Satisfied. The rezoning of the 0.73 acre site from P -I to R -H is proposed concurrently with an amendment to the General Plan changing the site from Public Institutional to Residential High Density, to allow future High Density Residential development. Rezoning the 0.73 acre portion of the site to an R -H classification is consistent with the General Plan, as amended. The R -H zoning designation allows multi -family residential development, which is mutually supportive and compatible with existing on surrounding properties (see Rohnert Park Municipal Code § 17.06.050). 2. That the proposed zoning and/or amendment will be beneficial to and not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Criteria Satisfied. Rezoning the 0.73 acre project site from P -I to R -H will be beneficial to public health, safety, and welfare by allowing multi -family residential uses to be established on the project site. Pursuant to the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, areas zoned R -H accommodate multi -family residential uses, which are mutually - supportive and compatible with existing and proposed development on surrounding properties (see Rohnert Park Municipal Code § 17.06.050). 3. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public testimony regarding the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Criteria Satisfied. A duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning Map amendments was held on April 28, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that it does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Findings hereinabove; rezone the 0.73 acre site fronting Southwest Boulevard Public Institutional to High Density Residential and amend the City Zoning Map, as shown in the amended Zoning Map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit 1. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of April, 2016, by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: Attest: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ADAMS BLANQUIE BORBA GIUDICE HAYDON John Borba, Chairperson, City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Susan Azevedo, Recording Secretary EXHIBIT 1 ZONING MAP JOHN REED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ALICIA PARK 435 Southwest Blvd Zoning R -E: Estate Residential R -R: Rural Residential R -L: Low Density Residential R -M: Medium Density Residential MOUNTAIN SHADOWS MIDDLE SCHOOL R -H: High Density Residential R-M/M-H: Medium Density Residential/Mobile Home Overlay C -N: Neighborhood Commercial C-R: Regional Commercial C -O: Office Commercial I -L: Industrial I-L/O: Industrial/Office Overlay M -U: Mixed Use P -I: Public Institutional Attachment: BENICIA PARK WALDO-ROHNERT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL "V/- ON VGON 0 250 500 1,000 Feet