Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 5.A 01/26/2015, Part 2 - Attachments 7-13ATTACHME, NT 7 RESOLUTION NO. 2014-18 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION & SUBDIVISION PROJECT LOCATED AT 470 AND 498 CORONA ROAD (496, 520, & 522 Corona Rd included in the annexation and 0 Riesling being the basin site) APN 137-061-009 & 011 (137-061-007, 008, & 010 included in the annexation and 137-070-049 being the basin site) Project File No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. submitted on application for Annexation, Pre - Zoning, Landmark Designation, Tentative Subdivision Map for a 31 -lot subdivision, and Authorization for a Detention Basin on City Lands for the Corona Road Annexation & Subdivision Project located at 470 and 498 Corona Road (with 496, 520, & 522 Corona Rd included in the annexation and 0 Riesling being the basin site); these requests are collectively referred to as "the Project" or.the "proposed Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the Petaluma General Plan 2025, adopted by the City on May 19, 2008; and WHEREAS, in evaluating certain potential environmental effects of the Project, including but not limited to effects of climate change, water supply, and traffic, the City relied on the program EIR for the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025, certified on April 7, 2008 (General Plan EIR) with the adoption of Resolution No. 2008-058 N.C.S., which is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the General Plan EIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts and related mitigation measures and the City also adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant impacts that could not be avoided; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study for the proposed Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was required in order to analyze the potential for new or additional significant environmental impacts of the Project beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR, and the MND and its supporting Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, on or before November 17, 2013, the City's Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study, providing for a 30 -day public comment period commencing November 17, 2013 and ending December 17, 2013 and a Notice of Public Hearing for the Project to be held on January 28, 2014 before the City of Petaluma Planning Commission, was published and mailed to all residents and property owners within 500 feet of the Project as well as all persons having requested special notice of said Proceedings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 28, 2014, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. The Commission considered the Project, the MND, the supporting Initial Study, a staff report dated January 28, 2014 analyzing the -7-1 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-18 MND and the Project, and received and considered all written and oral public comments on environmental effects of the Project and continued the project to a date uncertain to allow the applicant time to consider Planning Commission recommendations; and WHEREAS, on or before July 10, 2014, notice that the continued hearing has been scheduled for July 22, 2014 before the City of Petaluma Planning Commission, was published and mailed to all residents and property owners within 500 feet of the Project as well as all persons having requested special notice of said proceedings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the analysis in the Initial Study/MND, the Project does not make a considerable contribution to the significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic and/or noise impacts identified in the General Plan 2025 EIR because of its small size; and - - WHEREAS, pursuant to further analysis in the Initial Study/MND, including evaluation using the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) recently adopted CEQA Guidelines and 2010 Clean Air Plan, the Project does not make a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative air quality or greenhouse gas emissions impacts found to be significant and unavoidable in the General Plan 2025 EIR, because of the Project's small size and lack of significant stationary sources of emissions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2014, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard and the Commission considered the Project, the MND and supporting Initial Study, staff reports dated January 28 and July 8, 2014 analyzing the MND and the Project, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and received and considered all written and oral public comments on environmental effects of the Project; and WHEREAS, the MND reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis of the potential for environmental impacts from the Project; and WHEREAS, the MND including its supporting Initial Study, and related project and environmental documents, including the General Plan 2025 EIR and all documents incorporated herein by reference, are available for review in the City Planning Division at Petaluma City Hall, during "normal business hours and the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings for the proposed project, File No. 09 -TSM -0344, is the City of Petaluma Planning Division, I 1 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952, Attention: Tiffany Robbe. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the Planning Commission recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Corona Road Annexation and Subdivision project, Exhibit 1, based on the following. The Initial Study for the Project identified potentially significant impacts, but revisions in the project plans agreed to by the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and supporting Initial Study were released for public review would avoid 1. the impacts to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur from approval and implementation of the Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends the following modifications to proposed mitigation in the Initial Study and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-18 I . Mitigation Measure CUL -2 should be revised to require that all non -wood windows be replaced with wood -sashed double -hung single -light windows (or awning, fixed, etc. should an original hole size direct such). 2. Mitigation Measure AQ -2(3) should be revised to specify that truck trips driving through residential neighborhoods shall be limited to school hours, avoiding drop off and pick up times, and no weekend/holiday haul trips shall be permitted. 3. Mitigation Measure HYDRO -1 should be revised to correctly identify the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) not SWMP. ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote: Commission Member.,Aye No Absent Abstain l Benedetti-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolpert X Bill Wolpert, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: Hines, ComrnAiion Secretary Eric W. Danly, City Attorney 7- 3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-18 ATTACHMENT8 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL AGENCY THE CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION LOCATED AT 470 AND 498 CORONA ROAD ALONG WITH ABUTTING PROPERTIES 496, 520, & 522 CORONA ROAD COMPRISING A TOTAL PROJECT AREA OF 11.6 -ACRES APNs 137-061-007, 008, 009, 010, & 011 PROJECT FILE No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, Corona Road Associates, LCC submitted an application for Annexation, Pre - Zoning, Landmark Designation, Tentative Subdivision Map for -a 31 -lot subdivision, and Authorization For a Detention Basin on City Lands for the Corona Road Annexation & Subdivision Project located at 470 and 498 Corona Road (with 496, 520, & 522 Corona Rd included in the annexation and 0 Riesling being the basin site); and these requests are collectively referred to as "the Project" or the "proposed Project"; and WHEREAS, in order to implement the project it is necessary to annex properties at 470 and 498 Corona Road known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) 137-061- 009 & 011; and WHEREAS, in order to create a regular and logical annexation boundary it is necessary to annex three separately owned properties along Corona Road: 496 Corona Road (Vallimont, APN 137-061-010); 520 Corona Rood (Osheo, APN 137-061-008); and 522 Corona Road (Smith, APN 137-061-007). WHEREAS, each of the separately owned properties along Corona Road are approximately a half acre in size and are currently developed with a single-family house and associated accessory out building(s). WHEREAS, the project proposes to provide water and sewer stub outs to these three existing parcels, as required by City Resolution 8955; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on the Project, including the annexation request, on January 28 and July 22, 2014, at which time the Commission considered the Project, the MND and supporting Initial Study, staff reports dated January 28 and July 22, 2014 analyzing the MND and the Project, and received and considered all written and oral public comments on environmental effects of the Project; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2014-18 recommending adoption of the MND, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council support application to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Sonoma County for a proposed: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-19 L _ l, Annexation of approximately 11.6 acres located at 470, 496 498, 520, and 522 Corona Road, known as assessor's parcel numbers 137-061-007, 008, 009, 010, and 011, to the corporate boundaries of the City of Petaluma; Said territory is comprised of five separate parcels that have been used for residential uses, and in the past for agricultural uses; and Excludes Corona Road. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for the requested reorganization are: 1. The property is contiguous to the City and is within the adopted Sphere of Influence and General Plan Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Petaluma. 2. The approximately 11.6 -acre pre -zoning is in accordance with the General Plan designation for the lands, such that 5.6 acres of subdivision lands nearest Corona Road (north portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) and the three approximately 1/2 - acre annexation parcels (APN 137-061-007, 008, and 010) are pre -zoned R1 (Residential 1) consistent with the General Plan's Very Low Density Residential (VLDR, allowing 0.6 to 2.5 housing units to the net acre) and the approximate 4.5 acres of the subdivision lands farthest from Corona Road (south portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) are pre -zoned R2 (Residential 2) consistent with the General Plan's Low Density Residential (LDR, allowing 2.6 to 8.0 housing units to the net acre). 3. The annexation is consistent with the objectives and policies of the Petaluma General Plan 2025 and Corona Ely Specific Plan, as documented in January 28 and July 8, 2014 Planning Commission staff reports. 4. This annexation will enable several provisions of the General Plan to be achieved including: orderly improvement of City infrastructure, preservation of the city's Urban Growth Boundary, and preservation of County land uses, including residential and agricultural uses. BELT FURTHER RESOLVED that in its recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission does not recommend annexation of Corona Road for the following reasons, as further discussed in the January 28 and July 22, 2014 Planning Commission staff reports: 1. Corona Road is outside the City's Urban Growth Boundary. 2. The City has a long-standing policy to keep Corona Road rural in nature with no City improvements. All development over the last 25 years along this eastern stretch of Corona Road has been limited in size and intensity and had limited access to Corona Road. Only larger parcel sizes with larger setbacks have been allowed. Existing historic -era homes and barns and water tanks have been conditioned to remain. Urban -type street improvements have not been permitted. The vision for a rural - feeling country road has been consistently applied throughout these 21/2 decades, and the result is that this roadway is distinct from roadways within City limits. Twenty- five years later, the community still identifies Corona Road as a country road. 3. The Petaluma General Plan 2025 does not support annexation of Corona Road as outlined in the following policies: a. Keep Corona Road as a rural two-lane road east of Sonoma Mountain Parkway (2-P-104 North East Subarea). Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-19 8 - 2 b. Corona Road(east) is an entry gateway where the intent is to protect/enhance the cultural landscapes and ecological diversity that exists there (2 -P -6A). c. That the first 255 feet from Corona Road shall have a Very Low Density Residential, land use designation which allows only .6 to 2.5 homes per net acre (General Plan Land Use Map). Within the City limits, the City use this designation rarely and only at steep and/or County abutting lots. 4. Petaluma's Corona Ely Specific Plan does not support annexation of Corona Rood. states: a. The existing tree canopy and older homes along Corona Road are features that contribute to the character of the area and represent opportunities to add interest and meaning to new development (Page 42). b. Preservation of the existing trees and the overall rural feeling of Corona Road are — goals for the Corona Road Corridor of the Plan (Page 44). c. Corona Road is a Scenic Country Corridor (Figure 4-2 between pages 45 and 46). d. That the existing tree canopy along Corona Road must be protected and preserved (Page 58, Tree Preservation, Policy 31). e. That typical rural features along Corona Rood must be retained to the maximum extent feasible and future development along Corona Road should repeat these features. These features include open fencing for the lots along Corona Road and a design of the residences proposed along Corona that is consistent with the architecture of existing residences located along Corona Road. (Page 58, Rural Details, Policy 33). 5. The subdivision proposes no new public services from Corona Road. All new services come from the City side, via Monica Way. Water and sewer service to the existing abutting residential properties 137-D61-007, 008, and 010 will be provided from the - proposed subdivision rather than Corona Road. No new driveway is proposed at Corona Road. ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote: Commission Member , TAye No Absent Abstain Benedetti-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolped X b-3 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-19 till Wolpert, Chair ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: He Hines, Co mission Secretary Eric W. Donly, City Atto y Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-19 6-4 ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-20 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO PRE -ZONE THE CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION & SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 470 AND 498 CORONA ROAD ALONG WITH ABUTTING PROPERTIES 496, 520, & 522 CORONA ROAD COMPRISING A TOTAL PROJECT AREA OF 11.6 -ACRES APNs 137-061-007, 008, 009, 010, & 011 -- PROJECT FILE No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. submitted an application to annex and Pre - Zone a total of approximately 11.6 acres outside of the City limits but within the Urban Growth Boundary, in a manner consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation, being the Corona Road Annexation and Subdivision project area, for the purpose of developing a 31 -lot residential subdivision on 10.1 acres of the project area; and WHEREAS, the application consists of annexation, pre -zoning and subdivision of parcels 470 and 498 Corona Road (APN 137-061-009 and 011) and annexation and pre -zoning of three abutting Yz-acre parcels each developed with a house and accessory out building(s) which are included in the proposed annexation in order to create a regular and logical annexation boundary (496 Corona Road (Vallimont, APN 137-061-010), 520 Corona Road (Oshea, APN 137- 061-008), and 522 Corona Road (Smith, APN 137-061-007), the applications are collectively referred to as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the application proposes to pre -zone the lands in a manner directly consistent with the General Plan designation, such that: • the approximately 5.6 acres of the subdivision area nearest Corona Road and with a General Plan designation of Very Low Density Residential (north portion of APN 137- 061-009 and 011) gains a pre -zoning designation of R1; and • the three '/z -acre residential lots along Corona Road proposed to be annexed so as to create a regular and logical annexation boundary area and with a General Plan designation of Very Low Density Residential (APN 137-061-007, 008, and 010) gain a pre -zoning designation of R 1; and • the approximately 4.5 acres of the subdivision area farthest from Corona Road and with a General Plan designation of Low Residential Density (south portion of APN 137- 061-009 and 011) gains a pre -zoning designation of R2; and WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings to consider the Project, including the proposed Pre -Zoning, on Implementing Zoning Ordinance Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-20 1 - ( amendment, on January 28 and July 22, 2014, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered staff reports dated January 28 and July 22, 2014, analyzing the Project, including the pre -zoning, and the related Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, at the public hearings of January 28 and July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission reviewed the CEQA evaluation and by Resolution No. 2014-18, dated July 22, 2014 recommended to the City Council adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and recommended support for application to LAFCO for the proposed annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council pre -zoning of the subject parcels in accordance with the General Plan designation for the lands, such that 5.6 acres of subdivision lands nearest Corona Road (north portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) and the three approximately yz-acre annexation parcels (APN 137-061-007, 008, and 010) are pre -zoned R1 (Residential 1) and the approximately 4.5 acres of the subdivision lands farthest from Corona Road (south portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) are pre -zoned R2 (Residential 2) based on the findings made below: 1. The proposed amendment to the Implementing Zoning Ordinance to pre -zone the subject parcels R1 and R-2 is consistent with and implements the Very Low Density Residential and Low Density Residential land use classifications of the General Plan, as stated on Page 10 of the Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO). 2. The proposed pre -zoning is consistent with the public necessity, convenience, and general_ welfare in that it will implement General Plan and specific planning for the area out to the Urban Growth Boundary, and with R1 and R2 pre -zoning designations that are consistent with and compatible with similarly zoned areas adjacent to the Project area, all as further described and analyzed in the December 17, 2013 staff report ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote: Commission Member Aye No Absent Abstain' Benedetti-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolpert X Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-20 9 - 2 B'i Wolpert, Chair ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: A', fto O�A'- I He/Ker Hines, Cot o mission Secretary Eric W. Danly, City Att9�y 9-3 Planning Commission Resoluiion No. 2014-20 .11/_►Fou RESOLUTION NO. 2014-21 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL DESIGNATE THE HOUSE AT 498 CORONA ROAD AS A LOCAL HISTORIC LANDMARK APN 137-061-009 PROJECT FILE No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, the applicant, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C., submitted an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map for a 31 -lot residential subdivision to be comprised of the existing house at 498 Corona Road remaining at its current location and the creation of 30 new vacant residential lots, along with associated requests for Annexation, Pre -Zoning, and authorization to construct a detention basin, the applications are collectively referred to as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, a Cultural Resources and Historic Structures Evaluation dated June 2009 was prepared in connection with CEQA review for the project and is on file with the Project MND, is incorporated herein by reference and is available for review at City Hall during normal business hours, and WHEREAS, the Cultural Resources and Historic Structures Evaluation identified the existing 1900 -era farmhouse at 498 Corona Road (proposed Lot 6), as retaining its overall Victorian farmhouse appearance and having historic significance, pursuant to IZO section 15.040.1; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study/MND Mitigation Measure CUL -2 in the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration requires that the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road be designated as a Local Historic Landmark; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study/MND Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and CUL -2 ensure that the 1900 -era farmhouse does not suffer "demolition by neglect," and require limited rehabilitation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road including: • replacement of all non -original windows with era appropriate wood -sashed, double - hung windows in the original openings; • replacing missing or distressed material with matching materials; • retaining and reusing original materials as possible; and • Requires that all work is done in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties within Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings. WHEREAS, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. has agreed to local designation and rehabilitation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark (CUL -1 and CUL -2); and WHEREAS on January 28, 2014 the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee reviewed the proposed designation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council designate the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark; and Planning Commission P.esoluilon No. 2014-21 WHEREAS, on January 28 and July 22, 2014 the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the Project, including the requested local historical landmark designation, received public comment, and considered the proposed landmark designation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council designate the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road as a local historic landmark based on the following findings: 1. Designation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark is consistent with the Petaluma General Plan 2025 in that it identifies, recognizes, and protects a historic resource that is part of Petaluma's unique and irreplaceable cultural heritage (3-P-1) and designates a local landmark as part of the development review process (3-P-1 D). 2. Designation of the farmhouse of 498 Corona Road will further implement historic preservation objectives outlined in Chapter 15 of the Implementing Zoning - --Ordinance (IZO) in that it will serve to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public through the protection and enhancement of a building that is a reminder of past eras important to local history by ensuring that the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road is subject to the historic preservation controls and standards in said Chapter. 3. Designation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark is consistent with the Corona Ely Specific Plan which cites the older country homes along Corona Road as one of the primary contributors to Corona Road's special character (page 44) and directs retention of Corona Road's special character. Figure 4-2 of the Corona Ely Specific Plan identifies this house as one of the "Distinctive Country Homes and Farmsteads" along the east side of Corona Road. 4. The Cultural and Historic Evaluation Report identifies the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road, as having historic value; in that the house: a. Retains an overall Victorian farmhouse appearance. ...--.._.. b. Exhibits integrity of location, feeing, workmanship, and setting. c. Has not been moved and the setting along Corona Road has remained much the same. Although outbuildings associated with the farmhouse have been removed, the removal is not obvious from Corona Road. d. Workmanship has not been compromised. e. Retains original integrity of design and material including the crucial elements of the front gable with the fish scale shingles on the hipped roof, which combine to form the most important architectural component, and other original design elements including the small covered porch area with scroll brackets, the clapboard siding, and the window surrounds. 5. Heritage Homes of Petaluma noted that the house "is a contributor to a cohesive collection of small historic farm complexes and buildings that make Corona Road an important link to Petaluma's agricultural past." BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends, pursuant to IZO § 15.040.13, that the Ordinance designating the landmark includes: A. The following description of the characteristics of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road justify its designation as a local historic landmark and are excerpts from the Cultural Resources and Historic Structures Evaluation prepared by Archaeological Resource Services, dated June 2009: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-21 ` Z 1. The house has historic value; in that it: - a. Retains an overall Victorian farmhouse appearance. b. Exhibits integrity of location, feeling, workmanship, and setting. c. Has not been moved and the setting along Corona Road has remained much the same. Although ancillary structures have been removed, the removal is not obvious from Corona Road. d. Workmanship has not been compromised. e. Retains original integrity of design and material including the crucial elements - of the front gable with the fish scale shingles on the hipped roof, which combine to form the most important architectural component, and other original design elements including the small covered porch area with scroll brackets, the clapboard siding, and the window surrounds. 2. Preservation of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road is needed in order to maintain Corona Road's general historic feeling: a. Figure 4-2 of the Corona Ely Specific Plan identifies this house as one of the "Distinctive Country Homes and Farmsteads" along the east side of Corona Road. The Corona Ely Specific Plan cites the older country homes along Corona Road as one of the primary contributors to Corona Road's special character and directs retention of Corona Road's special character. b. Heritage Homes of Petaluma noted that the house "is a contributor to a cohesive collection of small historic farm complexes and buildings that make Corona Road an important link to Petaluma's agricultural past." B. The following character defining elements of the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road are to be preserved: 1. The front -facing pedimented lower cross gable that is sided with fish scale; 2. The primary hipped roof; 3. The small covered porch area with scroll brackets replication in-kind and replacement of missing scroll brackets at the eastern post of the entry porch; 4. The 8 -inch horizontal clapboard siding; and 5. The window surrounds. C. The location of the landmark is 498 Corona Road and the boundaries of the landmark are Lot 6 of the Corona Road Subdivision (being the first 193 feet from Corona Road of assessor's parcel number 137-061-009. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends, in addition to Mitigation Measure CUL -1 and CUL -2, the following conditions of approval shall apply to the property to at 498 Corona Rood: A. The farmhouse at 498 Corona Road shall be placed on Petaluma's local register of historic landmarks by the City. B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction for the subdivision, the landmark designation shall be recorded by the applicant with the Sonoma County Recorder's office as a deed rest(ction, and proof of such recordation shall be provided to the Planning Division. C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction for the subdivision, pursuant to CUL -1, the required 498 Corona Road rehabilitation work shall be done and, pursuant to the Initial Study discussion, the replacement of missing Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-21 , C) J 3 or distress materials with matching original materials shall include the 8 -inch horizontal wood clapboard siding where it has been removed from the east side of the house, those scroll brackets that are missing from the eastern post of the entry porch, and the Corona Road facing windows (see CUL -2). These conditions have been incorporated into the Tentative Subdivision Map project conditions. ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote: - - Commission Member Aye No Absent Abstain Benedetti-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolpert X ATTEST: 1121elaw /2. 1-1761WWHines, Co mission Secretary Bill Wolpert, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: a- � Eric W. Danly, City Aftorp4y Planning Commission Resoluiion No. 2014-21 1 b —i ATTACFINIENT 11 11 •'tit I [01 -ii, • 11 J CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE CORONA ROAD SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 470 AND 498 CORONA ROAD COMPRISING A TOTAL PROJECT AREA OF 10.1 -ACRES APNs 137-061-009 & 011 PROJECT FILE No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, the applicant, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C., submitted an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide approximately 10.1 acres at 470 and 498 Corona Road, APN 137-061-009 and 011 into a 31 -lot single family residential subdivision, comprised of the existing house at 498 Corona Road remaining at its current location and the creation of 30 new vacant residential lots, along with associated requests for Annexation, Pre -Zoning, a landmark designation, and authorization to construct a detention basin, the applications are collectively referred to as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, on January 28 and July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted duly noticed hearings on the Project, including the tentative map, at which time the Planning Commission considered a staff report analyzing the Project and related Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and considered the MND and ail documents and evidence submitted; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolutions recommending adoption of the MND, supporting the annexation, pre -zoning the annexation lands in the manner consistent with the General Plan designation, and designating the house at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council finds and determines as follows: 1. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of Title 20, Subdivisions, of the Petaluma Municipal Code (Subdivision Ordinance) and the California Subdivision Map Act. 2. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 (General Plan) because: a. Residential density of 9 units over the 5.6 gross acres of subdivision lands nearest Corona Road (north portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) pre -zoned R1 (Residential 1) is consistent with the General Plan Very Low Density Residential land use designation for the site and with the General Plan density range for the site, calculated on net acreage of approximately 4.7 net acres using the Very Low Residential density range of 0.6 to 2.5 dwelling units per net acre, resulting in a range for the Project between 2.8 and 11.8 total units. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 b. Residential density of 22 units over fhe 4.5 gross acres of subdivision lands farthest from Corona Road (south portion of APN 137-061-009 and 011) pre -zoned R2 (Residential 2) is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site and with the General Plan Low Density Residential density range for the site, calculated on net acreage of approximately 3.2 net acres using the Low Density Residential density range of 2.6 to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre, resulting in an allowable range for the Project between 8.3 and 25.6 total units. c. The project includes annexation of land outside of City limits and within the UGB and the extension of both potable water and sewer services, pursuant to 1-P-38, d. The project proposes that Corona Road remain a rural two-lane road, pursuant to 2-P-104. 3. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvements, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare because adequate public facilities exist or will be installed, including roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, storm drains, and other infrastructure. .4. The Project is consistent with the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance because the pre -zoning to R1 and R2 is in accordance with the General Plan, all lot sizes and dimensions conform with R1 and R2 respectively. 5. Payment of the in -lieu housing fee is preferable in the case, as the small size of the project makes an on-site project of 5 units (15% of 30 units) impractical to administer and likely not financeable. Housing staff recommends payment of the in -lieu payment to the City's Housing Funds as a more appropriate requirement, pursuant to - -- Housing Element Program 4.4d. -- ---- -- --- 6. The Project site is physically suitable for the density and the type of development proposed because the density for the Project is consistent with each of the two General Plan density ranges on the site and the site accommodates a Project which is generally compatible in character of use and physical design with surrounding uses. 7. As concluded in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project, neither the design of the subdivision nor the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on the basis of the above findings, the Petaluma Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map, subject to the following conditions of approval: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 1 1 - 2 'TSM CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION AND SUBDIVISION 470 and 498 Corona Road (with 496, 520, & 522 Corona Rd included in the annexation and 0 Riesling being the basin site) APN 137-061-009 & 011 (with 137-061-007, 008, & 010 included in the annexation and 137-070-049 being the basin site) Project File No: 09 -TSM -0344 Planning Division: 1. Approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map is conditioned upon approval of annexation and pre -zoning boundaries consistent with the City Council's recommendations. 2. Prior to the issuance of any development permit, the applicant shall revise the site plan or other first sheet of the office and job site copies of the Building Permit plans to list these Conditions of Approval as notes. 3. All mifigotion measures adopted in conjunction with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Corona Road Annexation and Subdivision project are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of project approval. 4. Upon approval by the City Council, the applicant shall pay the Notice of Determination fee pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to the Planning Division. The check shall be made payable to the County Clerk, in the amount required and published by the Sonoma County Clerk for such fee. Planning staff will rile the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk's office within five (5) days of receiving Council approval (after the second reading of the Pre -Zoning Ordinance), provided that the applicant provides the required environmental filing fee to the City within one day of project approval. 5. _ Prior to approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall record Deed Restrictions on: a. Lots 1, 2, and 6 stating that "Fencing within 30 feet of the Corona Road property line (lots) shall be open, rural designs not more than 42 inches in height and any future driveway paving shall be limited in width for the first 70 feet from the Corona Road property line, pursuant to Corona Ely Specific Plan Policies 33 and 34." b. Lots 1 and 2 stating that "New homes, additions visible from Corona Road, and any outbuildings within 80 feet of Corona Road shall be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review. Any SPAR approval shall find that the rural feel of Corona Road has been maintained." c. Lots 1, 2, and 4 stating that "A public pedestrian and bicycle access path runs from public Street B (state name) to Corona Road across this lot." The Deed Restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and provided to the City in executed form suitable for recordation prior to approval of the Final Map. 6. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the improvement plans shall call out improvements in the public right-of-way including the street trees, the ground cover, and the street lights in the planter strips and the parking canoes, pursuant to staff review and approval. Staff shall coordinate review of the street trees with the Tree Advisory Committee. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 ' , — Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the detention basin sheet(s) shall show a sign to be posted on the east side of the multi -use path between Corona Creek and the detention basin, providing public information explaining the basin function and its potential hazards and safety features. The sign shall be metal and/or wood, post mounted, with a total height not to exceed 6 feet, and a sign board approximately 24 inches high and 18 inches wide, subject to review and approval of the Planning Division. Content shall be as stated above and shall be approved by the City Engineer and Planning Division prior to Improvement Plan approval. 8. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall: a. Submit to the City Planning Division a copy of the 401 certification from the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. b. Submit to the City Planning Division a copy of the Army Corps Section 404 Individual Permit authorization, c. As directed by the Army Corps of Engineers and State Water Board Quality Control Board, the applicant shall show proof of purchase from the appropriate Mitigation Bank for wetland mitigation credits and/or incorporate suitable measure into the project design via the detention basin to offset impacts to seasonal wetlands. Submit to the City Planning Division written approval of the mitigation bank purchase(s) and/or any other written record of compliance. Prior to issuance of any individual lot grading or house building permit, the subdivision building elevations, site plan, front yard landscape, and exterior lighting plan shall be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review and Approval by the Planning Commission. 10. Prior to each new home's Site Plan and Architectural Review at Planning Commission, the applicant shall submit the GreenPoints Checklist showing that each new house is designed to achieve at least 50 GreenPoints under that cycle's residential Build It Green program. The Initial Study/MND Greenhouse Gas discussion (page 44) was based on the project having at least a 50 -point rating. Prior to building permit issuance, the Checklist shall be submitted and the building permit plans shall show those measures. Each home shall successfully pass the GreenPoint Rated inspections, per the submitted Green Point Rated checklist, meeting the minimum requirement condition of approval threshold. Confirmation of passed inspections will be provided by a certified Green Point Rater via a confirmation letter at time of final city inspection. 11. All construction trucks hauling soils from the detention basin site shall be subject to refinement of AQ -2 to cease trucking during school drop off and pick up periods; that is, on days school is in session, trucking trips to and from the site may begin at 9om and shall cease between 2:40 and 3:10pm (1:40 and 2:10 pm on Wednesdays), though may be recommenced from 3:10 to 4:00pm (2:10 to 4:00 on Wednesdays). Soil hauling work and detention basin grading work shall be done during school breaks if at all possible, and in such case, all haul trips shall occur between Sam and 4:30pm. 12. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit at Lot 2 or driveway work at Lot 1, a security deposit shall be posted to cover the value of protected palm trees 29 and 30 during the construction process, pursuant to section 17.060F. 13. Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, any protected tree with a canopy within 20 feet of the limit of work shall be evaluated by an arborist. The Tree Protection Zone shall be established (see also Mitigation Measure Bio -9) and any recommendation (for Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 ' 1 - example: place 4 -inch layer of chipped bark mulch over the soil and/or prune to clean and reduce end weight of the canopy per International Society of Arboriculture pruning standards) included as part of the proposed work. Temporary protective tree fencing shall be secured with in -ground posts. Proof that the temporary fencing has been installed shall be submitted to the Planning Division by photographs prior to building or grading permit issuance and shall be maintained in place for the duration of adjacent construction. 14. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction or subdivision improvements, the detention basin shall be in place and operational to ensure floodplain capacity. 15. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction, those house plans shall note the installation of high efficiency heating equipment (90% or higher heating/furnaces) and low NOx water heaters (40 or less) in compliance with General Plan policy 4 -P -15D (reducing emissions in residential units). All residential units designed with fireplaces shall meet the requirements of Ordinance 1881 N.C.S. for clean -burning fuels. 16. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction, those house plans shall include pre -wiring for solar facilities for each dwelling, in accordance with Council Resolution 2005-151, and are subject to staff review and approval. - 17. The farmhouse at 498 Corona Road shall be placed on Petaluma's local register of historic landmarks by the City. 18. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction for the subdivision, the landmark designation shall be recorded by the applicant with the Sonoma County Recorder's office as a deed restriction, and proof of such recordation shall be provided to the Planning Division. 19. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for new house construction for the subdivision, pursuant to CUL -1, the required 498 Corona Road rehabilitation work shall be done and, pursuant to the Initial Study/MND discussion, the replacement of missing or distress materials with matching original materials shall include the 8 -inch horizontal wood clapboard siding where it has been removed from the east side of the house, those scroll brackets that are missing from the eastern post of the entry porch, and the Corona Road facing windows (see CUL -2). 20. The project shall pay all applicable Development Impact Fees and other fees as required by City ordinonce or regulation. The 30 new homes shall be subject to the applicable in - lieu housing fees, as this is the Housing staff recommended alternative method of meeting the intent of the inclusionary requirement. 21. Prior to acceptance of the subdivision by the City of Petaluma, the project shall pay Communities Facilities development fees and City and Neighborhood Park fees, as well as water and sewer hookup fees for the four existing houses being annexed as part of this project: 496, 498, 520, and 522 Corona Road, pursuant to City Council Resolution 8955. 22. This Tentative Subdivision Map shall be null and void unless annexation to the City occurs within one year from the time the application is certified as complete, pursuant to Muni Code 20.16.005B. 23. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officials, boards, commissions, agents, officers and employees ("Indemnitees") from any claim, action or proceeding against Indemnitees to attack, set aside, void or annul any of the approvals of the project to the maximum extent permitted by Government Code section 66477.9. To Planning Commission P,esoluiion No. 2014-22 the extent permitted by Government Code section 66477.9, the applicant's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless in accordance with this condition shall apply to any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought concerning the project, not just such claims, actions or proceedings brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action or proceeding concerning the subdivision. The City shall cooperate fully in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, and if the City chooses to do so, applicant shall reimburse City for attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the City to the maximum extent permitted by Government Code section 66477.9. Department of Public Works (Engineering Division): The following conditions shall be addressed at the time of final map and improvement plan application. Frontage Improvements and Streets (show on Subdivision Improvement Plans and Final Map): 24. City standard improvements shall be installed including but not limited to: 36 -foot wide street with two 10 -foot wide travel lanes and two 8 -foot wide parking strips, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway approaches, landscaping, streetlights, public utilities, fire hydrants and hydrant markers, signage and striping. The public sidewalk shall be 5 -foot wide with a public landscape strip of 4.5 feet wide. The developer shall dedicate 56 -feet of public right of way on the final map for proposed public Streets A and B and Monica Way. 25. The proposed cul-de-sacs shall be 96 feet in diameter include three spaces each of interior island parking as proposed on the tentative map. The public right of way in the cul-de-sac area shall be located 10 -feet behind the cul-de-sac and shall be dedicated to the City on the final map. 26. The structural street section for public Streets A and B, and Monica Way, shall be 4 -inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 12 -inches of class 2 aggregate base (AB). 27. All new streetlights shall have LED heads. Streetlight spacing shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 28. No parking signs and red curb shall be installed on Monica Lane adjacent to lots 17 and 31, within street curves and curb returns, on emergency vehicle access easements and shared private driveways, and in front of fire hydrants and mailboxes. No parking signs and red curb shall be installed on the northeast side of the existing Monica Lane. 29. Bollards shall be installed in the multi -use path, at the entrance to public Street B and Corona Road. The proposed multi -use path shall be asphalt concrete. A smooth, level conform shall be provided at the connection point to Corona Road and a driveway approach at public Street B. 30. A stop sign and stop bar limit line with street name signs shall be installed on Monica Way at public Street A/B. 31. The minimum longitudinal gutter slope is 0.5% per City standards. 32. Construction access to the Corona Road project area for all site improvements shall be limited to Corona Road and is prohibited via Andover Lane and Monica Way. During construction of residences, construction vehicle access shall be limited to Corona Road to all extents possible. The developer shall be responsible for repairing any damage to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 ' ` 6 Corona Road caused by construction equipment, subject to County of Sonoma standards and requirements. 33. All public improvements and utilities shall be designed and constructed per City Standards as well as Caltrans and MUTCD standards as determined by the City Engineer. 34. All public improvements including sidewalks, driveway approaches and curb ramps shall be accessible. 35. All public improvement work shall be completed prior to issuance of a final inspection/certificate of occupancy for the last 20% percent of units. 36. Traffic control plans are required for all stages of construction and shall be per latest Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards. Drainage and Grading: 37. The proposed detention basin shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the preliminary recommendations by the project Geotechnical Engineer, project Civil Engineer - and City of Petaluma consulting hydrologist. The construction level geotechnical and hydrology reports and project improvement plans, shall include final recommendations for the detention basin, subject to approval by the City Engineer. The developer shall fund all costs necessary for the final design and hydraulic modeling work by WEST consultants. The proposed basin shall be lined with compacted fill as recommended in the March 31, 2014 letter from Reese and Associates Consulting Geotechnical Engineers. A synthetic liner shall not be used. Hinged trash racks at culverts and safety measures shall be installed on the detention basin drainage/culvert system, subject to approval by the City of Petaluma. 38. The developer shall prepare a Letter of Map Change (LOMC) application, to remove the project site and surrounding areas, from the special flood hazard area. The application shall be submitted to the City of Petaluma Floodplain Administrator and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) upon completion of the detention basin. The approved LOMC shall be received by the City of Petaluma prior to issuance of any building permits for new structures. 39. The storm drain system and calculations shall be reviewed and approved by the Sonoma County Water Agency, prior to issuance of any construction permits. At the discretion of the City Engineer, the City may refer the final detention basin design and calculations to the Water Agency for review and approval, prior to issuance of any construction permits. 40. No lot -to -lot drainage is allowed without drainage easements, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 41. The project shall comply with the City of Petaluma Phase II Storm Water Management Plan including attachment four post construction requirements. The improvement plans shall be routed to the Marin -Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District to review and provide recommendations on storm water best management practices. 42. On-site storm drain treatment systems shall be privately owned and maintained. 43. Prior to final map approval, and pursuant to Resolution 94-210 (Liberty Farms Subdivision), the Corona Road Subdivision's interest in the existing temporary 10 -foot wide private storm drain easement (Doc# 1994-0110223) on Lots 39 and 40 of the Liberty Farms Subdivision shall be quitclaimed. Drainage from the Corona Road Subdivision shall not be allowed to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 (k F - continue in the rear of Lots 39 and 40 of Liberty Farms and shall be collected on the Corona Road Subdivision and discharged to a public storm drain system. 44. Prior to issuance of a building permit, an operations and maintenance manual is required for the proposed detention basin and public storm water treatment systems, and shall be submitted with the final map and improvement plan application for review and approval by the City Engineer. The manual shall include annual inspection, by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California, to ensure the detention, treatment and safety systems are operating as designed and constructed as well as provisions to make any necessary repairs to the system. A signed and sealed copy of the report shall be provided annually, prior to October 151h, to the Office of the City Engineer. 45. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall comply with the City's Phase II storm water management plan and State of California NPDES requirements including submittal of a notice of intent and storm water pollution prevention plan to the State and City. 46. Grading shall conform to the preliminary geotechnical investigation reports prepared by Giblin and Associates and updates by Reese and Associates as well as all final, construction level reports. 47. The City shall ensure ongoing maintenance of Corona Creek to allow adequate flow capacity to manage flooding. Water, Sewer and Utilities: 48. The three parcels in the unincorporated area currently outside the boundary of the subdivision (APN: 137-061-007, 008, and 010) shall have individual water services, meters and sewer laterals installed and connected prior to acceptance of the subdivision by the City of Petaluma. Should the property owners opt out of connecting at time of the subdivision construction, the developer shall install water and sewer stubs to the property line and have 10 years to complete the connections per City Resolution No. 8955. Prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvements, the Corona Subdivision developer shall provide adequate surety to the City of Petaluma to insure the services are installed within the 10 -year period mandated by Resolution No. 8955. Additionally, the developer shall provide the City of Petaluma documentation from the County of Sonoma that the existing septic systems and proposed well are functioning property, are not in a failed condition and are not a threat to public health or safety. In either scenario, the developer is responsible for paying all sewer and water connection and annexation fees as part of the subdivision development. The location of all water services and meters as well as sewer laterals shall be shown on the subdivision improvement plans. 49. The proposed well on parcel 6 shall be reviewed and approved by Sonoma County Environmental Health. An approved backflow prevention device shall be installed on the well per City standards. The developer shall provide the City Engineer documentation from Sonoma County Environmental Health that the new well has been completed, operable and approved for use. The new well shall be operable prior to discontinuation and abandonment of the existing well. The well will not be necessary should all parcels connect to City water at the time of the Corona Road Subdivision develops. 50. Each lot within the subdivision shall have individual water services and sewer laterals. All water services shall be a minimum of 11/z inches with a 1 -inch meter. All water meters shall be located in the public right of way landscape strip between the curb and sidewalk. Planning Commission Resoluiion No. 2014-22 ' ( 51. All wells and septic systems proposed to be abandoned shall be per Sonoma County Environmental Health requirements. 52. All landscaping shall meet City water efficiency standards for low water use. 53. A minimum 2 -inch grind and AC overlay will be required on all utility trench cuts along the length of the trench, for a minimum of '/2 the street width within existing City streets. The developer is responsible for repairing, to pre -project conditions, any damage to existing City infrastructure caused by Corona Road Subdivision development related activities, as determined by the City of Petaluma 54. All water main valves shall be located at curb extensions. 55. Landscaping in public utility easements shall be limited to ground cover and shallow rooted, low lying shrubs. Trees are not allowed. 56. A 10 -foot wide public utility easement is required along all project street frontages and shall be dedicated to the City of Petaluma on the final map. 57. Overhead utilities along the street frontages, within the project site or traversing the site shall be placed underground. 58. All existing unused water and sewer mains shall be identified on construction drawings and abandoned per City standards. 59. Draft joint trench plans are required with the public improvement plan submittal. PG&E approval of the joint trench plans is required prior to the start of any construction. Final Mar): 60. Dedicate the necessary public right of way, public access and utility or private easements on the final map. Any easements located outside the boundary of the subdivision shall be dedicated via grant deed with a legal description and plat. 67. An irrevocable offer of dedication for future public pedestrian and bicycle path is required along Lot 6 and shall be consistent with the proposed irrevocable offer for Lots 7 and 2 as shown on TM -6. 62. The project lighting and landscaping assessment district shall include funding for perpetual maintenance of the proposed public detention basin, public storm water runoff treatments system, public pathways, public landscaping, and public streetlights installed as part of the subdivision. 63. A funding mechanism, such as a homeowner's association or maintenance agreements, for long term maintenance of privately shared facilities such as, parking, driveways, pathways, utilities and drainage systems and shall be submitted with the final map application, and is subject to approval by the City of Petaluma. 64. Prior to final map approval, the developer shall submit an application for final annexation map to the City of Petaluma. 65. Prepare final map and improvement plans per the latest City policies, standards, codes, resolutions and ordinances. Technical review deposits shall be required at the time of application submittal. 11_q Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 66. Prior to issuance of any permits, a subdivision agreement package including City standard surety bonds and insurance, is required for the subdivision improvements. A separate public construction agreement package, including City standard surety bonds and insurance, is required for the construction of the proposed detention basin. Fire Marshal: 67. Prior to improvement plan approval, those plans shall show that the cul-de-sacs will be posted with "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and/or "red -curbing," subject to review and approval by Fre Marshal Office. 68. A fire sprinkler system designed and installed in accordance with NFPA13-D is required for all structures detailed in this project proposal. Due to the mitigating conditions listed below, the sprinkler systems for (some/all) of the units must be upgraded to meet the requirements of a FULLY SPRINKLERED system. This includes sprinkler protection of the attic, garage, attached carports, bathrooms over 55 sq.,fl., closets over 24 sq. ft. or 3 ff. deep, -- and/or other attached structural elements of the building. The system shall be calculated for a two -head for the most remote two heads. All systems require 3 set of plans to be submitted to the Fire Marshal's office for review and approval. ADOPTED this 22^d day of July, 2014, by the following vote: Commission Member 'Aye No Absent Abstain ' Benedetti-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolpert X Bill Wolpert, Chair ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Planning Commission Resoluiion No. 2014-22 ///)W, Heather Hines, ommission Se7c�' re Eric W. Danly, Ci y Attorney Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-22 ATTACHMENT 12 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION OF A DETENTION BASIN ON CITY LANDS EAST OF RIESLING ROAD BETWEEN CORONA CREEK SCHOOL AND KENILWORTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 0 Riesling Road APN 137-070-049 Project File No: 09 -TSM -0344 WHEREAS, the applicant, Corona Road Associates, L.C.C., submitted an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map for a 31 -lot residential subdivision to be comprised of the existing house at 498 Corona Road remaining at its current location and the creation of 30 new vacant residential lots, along with associated requests for Annexation and Pre -Zoning; and WHEREAS, the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) revisions were finalized by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and adopted in February of 2014 and show most of the proposed annexation area within the 100 -year floodplain for nearby Corona Creek; and WHEREAS, to address the 2014 Flood Insurance Rate Map showing the annexation area and surrounding area, the applicant proposes a detention basin at open field abutting Corona Creek, upstream of the project site, northeast of Riesling Road on approximately ±4.6 acres of Urban Separator lands between Corona Creek (northwest of Kenilworth. Junior High) and the ball field of the Corona Creek Elementary School; inside the City limits and at the UGB line; and WHEREAS, the detention basin proposal and design have been fully analyzed on behalf of the City by water engineering consultants, and found to successfully remove the subdivision and annexation and adjacent existing houses to the east and south from the -100 -year flood plain; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study/MND concludes that the proposed detention basin together with Mitigation Measures HYDRO 2 through 4 (agreed to by Corona Road Associates, L.C.C.) ensures that flood risks are reduced to levels below significance; and WHEREAS City Engineer and the Water Division have reviewed the proposal, accept it, and find that it will remove housing from the flood hazard associated with the 10 year and 100 year flood; and WHEREAS, after public review and input at duly noticed public hearings on January 28 and July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma adopted Resolutions recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, support of Annexation, Pre - Zoning the Annexation lands in the manner consistent with the General Plan designation, designation of the house at 498 Corona Road as a local landmark, and Tentative Subdivision Map approval of 10.1 acres into a 31 -lot subdivision, all relating to the Corona Road Annexation and Subdivision project; and WHEREAS, at the January 28 and July 22, 2014 public hearings, the Planning Commission also received public comment and considered the proposed detention basin on City lands in the Urban Separator east of Riesling Road. L_ Planning Commission Resoluilon No. 2014-23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council authorize construction of the detention basin, as modified by the project Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Tentative Subdivision Map approval, based on the based on the following findings: 1. The addition of the basin does not significantly change the use of the urban separator or prohibit residents from venturing out into the urban separator lands. 2. Location of the detention basin is consistent with the Corona Ely Specific Plan which designates that the urban separator serve the purpose of preserving views to Sonoma Mountain and serving as a barrier between residential uses and those occurring on County lands (such as agricultural uses). With the basin addition, the urban separator lands will continue to serve as a separator between residential uses and those occurring on County lands and existing views to Sonoma Mountain will remain as the detention basin is an excavation rather than projection. 3. Location of the detention basin is consistent with the Corona Ely Specific Plan which designates that the urban separator be passive open space and be 300 feet in depth. With construction of a detention basin, the subject urban separator segment will continue to serve as passive open space and be 300 feet in depth. As in the current condition, particularly as now designed with 5:1 slopes; nothing prevents residents from venturing out into the urban separator lands. 4. There is a precedent for detention basins in the urban separator lands; there is one in the Heritage Subdivision urban separator (between Lansdowne Way and Westminster Lane) and three in the Shelter Hills Subdivision urban separator (at St Augustine Circle). 5. The proposed Corona Subdivision with the Riesling Road detention basin replaces the lost floodplain storage due to build out of the proposed Corona Subdivision and reduces water surface elevations below existing elevations at the project site 6. Construction of the detention basin within the City's Urban Separator will provide the following benefits to the greater public good: a. The proposed detention basin will provide excess water storage capacity during the 100 -year storm event. This will reduce the downstream water surface elevation below existing elevations and reduce the overflow potential of Corona Creek; b. Existing surrounding homes that the new FIRM map shows as being located within the 100 year event flood zone will be removed and will not be required to have Flood insurance; c. The IOD -year water surface elevation will be reduced in Corona Creek by an average of about 0.5 feet; d. The 100 -year water surface elevation will be reduced in the Petaluma River by an average of about 0.01 feet; e. The project will construct the urban separator streetscape improvements which did not occur with build -out of the Graystone Creek subdivision. As required by the Corona Ely Specific Plan including Policies 124 and 125, the project will construct a 25 -foot wide, Urban Separator edge improvement, along the frontage of Riesling Road. Commencing at Riesling Road, the Urban Separator edge improvement will consist of a 6 foot landscape strip, an 8 foot multi -use concrete path, an 11 foot landscape strip, and a 3 foot high open -type vehicle barricade at the top of the detention basin bank. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-23 ADOPTED this 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote: ATTEST: Commission Member Aye No Absent Abstain' BenedeHi-Petnic X Lin X Gomez X Marzo X Councilmember Miller X Vice Chair Pierre X Chair Wolpert X Hines, Coyfimission Secretary Bi IBi I Wo�hair APPROVED AS TO FORM: Eric W. Danly, City Attorne lz—S Planning Commission Resolution No. 2014-23 ATTACHMENT 13 Prepared By: City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 �85$ October 24, 2013 CITY OF PETALUMA CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION AND SUBDIVISION CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND INITIAL STUDY OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND Project Title: CORONA ROAD ANNEXATION AND SUBDIVISION Lead agency name and address: City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 Contact person and phone number: Tiffany Robbe, Senior Planner (707) 778-4318 Project Location: 470 and 498 Corona Road, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137-061-009 & 011 Included in Annexation: 496, 520, and 522 Corona Road APN: 137-061-007, 008, and 010 Detention Basin: 0 Riesling Road (lands of City of Petaluma) APN: 137-070-049 Project sponsor's name and address: Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. 3480 Buskirk Avenue, #260 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 (925) 671-7775 Property Owners: Subdivision Area: Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. 3480 Buskirk Avenue, #260 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Detention Basin in Urban Separator: City of Petaluma, 11 English St, Petaluma, CA 94952 Residential properties proposed to be included in Annexation & PreZoning: Dana & Dawn Vallimont 496 Corona Rd, Petaluma, CA 94954 David Oshea, Custodian of 520 Corona Road 1088 DeHaro St., San Francisco, CA 94107 Trevor Smith Et al. 522 Corona Road, Petaluma, CA 94954 General plan designation: Subdivision and Annexation Area: Page 2 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-2 Page 3 of 79 October 24, 2013 (3-3 Sonoma County: Diverse Agricultural, 10 acres per residential unit (DA 10) City of Petaluma: Very Low Density Residential (VLD) and Low Density Residential(LDR) Detention Basin (Riesling Road): City of Petaluma: Urban Separator Zoning: Subdivision and Annexation Area: Sonoma County: Diverse Agriculture District, 10 acres per residential unit, Valley Oak Habitat Combining District (DA B6 10, VOH) City of Petaluma: Proposed Prezone R1 and R2 Detention Basin (Riesling Road): City of Petaluma: Open Space and Park Description of project: The applicant has applied to the City of Petaluma for: 1. Annexation of two development parcels totaling approximately 10.1 acres and three abutting parcels (Assessor's Parcels 137-061-007, 008, and 010) which each contain one residence on approximately one-half acre (so that the annexation boundary represents a regular and logical boundary); 2. Prezoning to R1 and R2 consistent with the City General Plan designations, for the same 5 parcels; 3. Tentative Subdivision Map approval to divide the two development parcels into 31 residential lots; and 4. Authorization to allow construction of a Corona Creek detention basin on the City's Urban Separator Lands (137-070-049) to mitigate the lost floodplain storage due to project development and to remove existing residences from the floodplain, pursuant to the 2013 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Page 3 of 79 October 24, 2013 (3-3 Surrounding land uses and setting; briefly The 10.1 acre subdivision area consists of two describe the project's surroundings: parcels that both front on Corona Road. Each parcel was used as a small chicken farm some decades ago. All structures except for the 1900's house at 498 Corona Road, which the applicant intends to retain, were removed prior to 2005. The site is bounded by existing residential development (designated Low Density Residential) to the east and south, within the City of Petaluma. Across Corona Road (to the west and north) is county land primarily in rural residential use. The project area is generally flat. Three parcels adjoin the proposed subdivision, with frontage along Corona Road; each consists of one house and associated outbuildings and each parcel is approximately a half -acre. The proposed annexation would include these parcels and the two parcels that comprise the subdivision area (10.1 acres), all five have been within the City's Urban Growth Boundary line since 1987. The proposed detention basin sits northeast of Riesling Road on ±4.6 acres of City -owned Urban Separator land. The proposed detention basin will be constructed between Corona Creek and the ball field of the Corona Creek Elementary School. Other public agencies whose approval is Fill of 0.87 acres of wetlands will require a Section required (e.g. permits, financial approval, or 404 Individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of participation agreements): Engineers and fill of the entire 0.94 acres of wetlands will require a Section 401 Certification from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Bay Division. The tie in to Corona Creek for the proposed detention basin and any improvements to the channel bed, bank, or top of bank will require a Streambed Alteration Agreement and Section 1600 Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The homes for the proposed subdivision will require Site Plan and Architectural Review approval by the City of Petaluma's Planning Commission. Annexation of the subdivision and the 3 existing lots will require approval from the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). The proposed capping of the existing private well and its relocation will require review and approval by Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department (PRMD) Well and Septic Division. The proposed detention basin will require review and approval of the public improvement plan by the City Engineer. October 24, 2013 13-4 CORONA ROAD SUBDIVISION AND ANNEXATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND........................................................... 1.1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION..................................................................... 1.2. PROJECT LOCATION........................................................................... 1.3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING............................................................... 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .................. 3. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................... 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 3.6. 3.7. 3.8. 3.9. 3.10. 3.11. 3.12. 3.13. 3.14. 3.15. 3.16. 3.17. 3.18. AESTHETICS.............................................................................................................. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ................................................... AIRQUALITY.............................................................................................................. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES....................................................................................... CULTURALRESOURCES.......................................................................................... GEOLOGY AND SOILS.............................................................................................. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS......................................................................... HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS..................................................................... HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY...................................................................... LAND USE AND PLANNING ............... ............................................................ ....... I... MINERALRESOURCES............................................................................................. NOISE PAGE # ....7 ..12 ..13 ...........14 IV ...................................................................................................................................................... POPULATIONAND HOUSING: ........................ ..................................................................................... 62 PUBLICSERVICES: ..................... ......................................................... .................... .......................... 63 RECREATION.........................................................................................................................................65 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION.............................................................................................66 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: ................................................................................................... 72 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §15065) ....................................77 4. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: .................................................................................................................... 79 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1 Corona Subdivision and Annexation Location Map.......................................................................9 Figure 2 Corona Subdivision and Annexation Land Use............................................................................10 Figure 3 Corona Subdivision and Annexation Zoning................................................................................11 Figure 4 Corona Subdivision Tentative Tract Map.......................................................................................11 Figure 5 Corona Creek Detention Basin........................................................................................................12 Figure6 1900's Era Farmhouse.....................................................................................................................15 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Operational Related Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Sizes.................................23 Table 2 AQ Emissions from Construction of the Detention Basin.............................................................24 Table 3 Operational Related GHG and Precursor Screening Sizes............................................................42 Table4 GHG Policies.......................................................................................................................................43 Table 5 Construction Phase Noise Levels....................................................................................................60 Table 6 LOS - Existing Condition...................................................................................................................67 Table 7 LOS - Baseline Condition with Proposed Project... ........................................................................ 67 Table 8 LOS - Build Out Cumulative Condition with Proposed Project.....................................................68 Page 5 of 79 October 24, 2013 I3-5 General Plan: The Petaluma General Plan 2025, adopted in 2008, serves the following purposes: • Reflects a commitment on the part of the City Council and their appointed representatives and staff to carry out the Plan; • Outlines a vision for Petaluma's long-range physical and economic development and resource conservation; enhances the quality of life for all residents and visitors; recognizes that human activity takes place within the limits of the natural environment; and reflects the aspirations of the community; • Provides strategies and specific implementing policies and programs that will allow this vision to be accomplished; • Establishes a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with Plan policies and standards; • Allows City departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance critical environmental resources, and minimize impacts and hazards; and • _Provides the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as Development Codes, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), facilities and Master Plans, redevelopment projects, and the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). General Plan EIR: Because CEQA discourages "repetitive discussions of the same issues' (CEQA Guidelines section 15152b) and allows limiting discussion of a later project that is consistent with a prior plan to impacts which were not examined as significant effects in a prior EIR or to significant effects which could be reduced by revisions in the later project (CEQA Guidelines section 15152d), no additional benefit to the environment or public purpose would be served by preparing an EIR merely to restate the analysis and the significant and unavoidable effects found to remain after adoption of all General Plan policies/mitigation measures. All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the subject Project. The EIR reviewed all potentially significant environmental impacts and developed measures and policies to mitigate impacts. Nonetheless, significant and unavoidable impacts were determined to occur under the General Plan. Therefore, the City adopted a statement of overriding considerations, which balances the merits of approving the project despite the potential environmental impacts. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan are: Increased motor vehicle traffic which would result in unacceptable level of service (LOS) at six intersections covered in the Master Plan: o McDowell Boulevard North/Corona Road, Lakeville Street/Caulfield Lane, Lakeville Street/East D Street, Petaluma Boulevard South/D Street, Sonoma Mt. Parkway/Ely Boulevard South/East Washington Street, and McDowell Boulevard North/Rainier Avenue. • Traffic related noise at General Plan buildout, which would result in a substantial increase in existing exterior noise levels that are currently above City standards. • Cumulative noise from proposed resumption of freight and passenger rail operations and possible resumption of intra -city trolley service, which would increase noise impacts. • Air quality impacts resulting from General Plan buildout to population levels that could conflict with the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy. (This regional air quality plan has since been replaced by the 2010 Clean Air Plan, which is further discussed in Sections 3.3 Air Quality and 3.7 Greenhouse Gases.) • A possible cumulatively considerable incremental contribution from General Plan development to the significant impact of global climate change. This environmental document tiers off of the General Plan EIR (SCH NO.: 2004082065), which was certified on April 7, 2008, to examine site- and project -specific impacts of the proposed annexation and subdivision project as described below. A copy of the City of Petaluma's General Plan and EIR are available at the Community Development Department, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California 94952, during normal business hours and online at http://citvofpetaluma.neUcdd/plan-general-plan.html. Page 6 of 79 October 24, 2013 13—.6 1.1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes the request to: 1. Annex two development parcels (APN: 137-061-009 and 011) totaling approximately 10.1 acres and three abutting parcels (APN: 137-061-007, 008, and 010) each of which are approximately one-half acre and developed with one residence (so that the annexation boundary represents a regular and logical boundary). See Figures 1 and 2; 2. Prezone to R1 and R2, consistent with the General Plan designations, for the same 5 parcels. See Figure 3; 3. Tentative Subdivision Map approval to divide the two development parcels into 31 residential lots. See Figure 4; and 4. Authorize construction of a Corona Creek detention basin on the City's Urban Separator Lands (137-070- 049) to mitigate the lost floodplain storage due to project development and to remove existing residences from the floodplain, pursuant to the 2013 FIRMS. See Figure 5. - The subdivision site is comprised of two parcels that both front onto Corona Road and total 10.1 gross acres. The site has been within the City's Urban Growth Boundary since 1987 but has not yet been annexed into the City. The project includes a tentative subdivision map and prezone for these parcels. The General Plan designates the northwestern -most land at the urban edge (along Corona Road) as Very Low Residential (0.6 to 2.5 dwelling units to the net acre) and the southeastern -most land, nearest to the existing residential neighborhood as Low Density Residential (2.6 to 8.0 dwelling units to the net acre). In conformance with the General Plan designations, the project proposes 9 parcels in the Very Low Residential area (1.9 dwelling units to the net acre) and 22 parcels in the Low Density Residential area (6.9 dwelling units to the net acre), for a total of 31 residential lots. Access for the proposed subdivision would be from an extension of Monica Drive that connects to Andover Way and onto Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Maria Drive, and Ely Road (See Figure 4). A 1900's residence remains on the subdivision property and would be retained on lot 6. Single-family residences for the other 30 lots would be designed in accordance with the R1 and R2 development standards and subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review. The project is located within the Corona/Ely Specific Plan Area. As proposed, all lots within the R1 zoning district are greater than the 20,000 square foot minimum lot size and all lots within the R2 zoning district are greater than the 6,000 square foot minimum lot size. Homes proposed within the R1 zoning district will comply with the R1 setback minimums of 30 feet from the front, street side, rear property line, and 15 feet from the side interior property line. Homes within the R2 zoning district will comply with the R2 setback minimums of 15 feet from the front and rear property line, a 10 -foot side setback at corners, a 3 - foot side interior setback, and a garage front setback of 20 feet. Homes proposed in either zoning district will be at or below the 25 foot maximum height limit applicable in both zoning districts. Lots 1 through 9 (See Figure 4) are those closest to Corona Road and within the Very Low Residential designation. These parcels are large, approximately '/: -acre lots intended to maintain the rural character of Corona Road, preserving healthy roadside trees and precluding the development of any new driveways along the Corona Road frontage. Lot 6 contains the existing house to be preserved and maintains the existing driveway off of Corona Road. Lots 10 through 31 (Figure 4) are those closest to Monica Way and within the Low Density Residential designation. These parcels are similar to or larger than those in the adjacent neighborhoods to the east and south of the subject subdivision site. At the subdivision edges, the lots are configured to have a similar lot width pattern as the lots they abut on Andover Way and within the Corona Creek subdivision to the south. The 31 -lot subdivision will be served by public streets that include public sanitary sewer, storm drain, and a public water main. Proposed vehicular access is from the extension of Monica Way into two cul-de-sacs, public Street A and public Street B. A public path will connect the western cul-de-sac (public Street B) out to Page 7 of 79 'T October 24, 2013 13-1 Corona Road via lots 2 and 5. The Monica Way extension and new public streets are designed according to City of Petaluma Public Works Standards for new residential streets. There will be full curb and gutter, planter strip, and sidewalks within the subdivision. The street section accommodates on -street parking (except at corners) and three additional public parking spaces are proposed in landscaped parking "canoes' at each cul-de-sac. Corona Road is proposed to remain under the County's jurisdiction in conformance with the General Plan which depicts the Urban Growth Boundary running along the southeast side of the roadway. The existing roadway section and tree cover along Corona Road are proposed to be retained. To create a regular and logical annexation boundary, three separately owned properties along Corona Road are proposed as part of the annexation proposal and related prezoning. These are 496 Corona Road (Vallimont, APN 137-061-007), 520 Corona Road (Oshea, APN 137-061-008), and 522 Corona Road (Smith, APN 137-061-007); each parcel is developed with one house and accessory out building(s) and each is approximately a half -acre. The project proposes to provide water and sewer stub outs to these three existing parcels included in the annexation area (TM -9). These 3 existing lots currently receive water from an existing well located on the proposed subdivision site, which will be capped and closed as part of the project. Although City water pipelines will be extended to these lots, the residents have requested that well water continue to be available. As such,this project includes the relocation of an existing groundwater well. No new or expanded groundwater use will be generated. The new well will serve the same 3 existing lots that the existing well currently serves. The new well is proposed to be sited at Lot 6 (containing the 1900s era farmhouse) and will replace the shared well located on the subject parcel and used by the three existing parcels. Capping of the existing well and well relocation is subject to review and approval by Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department (PRMD) Well and Septic Division. Lastly, the project proposes excavation of an approximately t4.6 acre offsite detention basin north of Riesling Road, which is located within the Urban Separator between Corona Creek (northwest of Kenilworth Junior High) and the Corona Creek Elementary School. The detention basin has been designed with side slopes of two horizontal units to one vertical unit (2:1). The top of the detention basin will be close to the Riesling Road elevation, at 52.1 North American Vertical Datum (NAVD)', with the bottom of the basin at elevation 45.1 NAVD. An overtopping adjustable weir is proposed at elevation 47.2 NAVD. The inlet pipe (36 inch diameter) of the detention basin will connect to the flow line of Corona Creek. The detention basin was designed and sized to replace the lost floodplain storage due to build out of the proposed Corona Subdivision and to remove a number of existing homes that the new FIRM map shows as being located within the 100 year event flood zone. The detention basin will reduce the 100 -year event flooding in the vicinity of the Corona Subdivision by an average of 0.30 feet over existing conditions. As part of the detention basin, the project proposes to construct the 25 -foot wide Urban Separator edge improvements along the frontage of Riesling Road, as specified by the Corona Ely Specific Plan. Commencing at Riesling Road, these are: a 6 foot landscape strip, an 8 foot multi -use concrete path, an 11 foot landscape strip, and a 3 foot high open fence at the top of the detention basin bank. The detention basin is subject to approval as part of the public improvement plan. - - The proposed detention basin will be constructed prior to construction of the first foundation on the subdivision property, in order to ensure that the subdivision and neighborhood west of Corona Creek is fully protected from potential impacts associated with flooding. Site preparation of the subdivision and detention basin site will occur in stages of construction where vegetation removal is followed by mass grading. Construction of the detention basin is expected to be completed within 2 months and will require the export of up to 81,000 cubic yards of cut. Construction of the subdivision site work is expected to occur over the course of one year with the initial activities consisting of infrastructure development, extension of utilities, and the paving of the public Streets A and B. Individual house construction on the subdivision site is expected to occur over several years depending on the market. ' NAVD is a standardized measuring method that is used to determine elevation. Page 8 of 79 _ October 24, 2013 3 D The applications and actions described above collectively constitute the "Project" for the purposes of this Initial Study. The following terms will be used throughout this Initial Study to refer to the Project components: Annexation Area: The entire Project area except for the detention basin. Subdivision Area: The portion of the Project area included in the Tentative Subdivision Map application. Existing Lots: The three existing, developed residential lots along Corona Road that are proposed for annexation and prezoning but are not included in the Tentative Subdivision Map. Detention Basin: The 4.6 -acre detention basin related to, but offsite of, the subdivision area. Figure 1: Corona Subdivision and Annexation Location Map Page 9 of 79 _ October 24, 2013 Figure 2: Corona Subdivision and Annexation Land Use Annexation Lots Subdivision & Annexation Page 10 of 79 Ij �' 7 October 24, 2013 !l Legend Very Low Residential Low Density Residential Open Space = Urban Separator -- Source: City GIS 2013 Figure 3: Corona Subdivision and Annexation Zoning Figure 4: Corona Subdivision Tentative Tract Map Page 11 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 — Legend -_— jwiEa-u.%IRI 4002RTOO6TNN NRW 6fif � FJLE fiLOP021 CUNOLUNE-M.v 10 L.Try 6TOMGE YDLIINE cA53116 LUFL 116]9Am FL) . F Source: Figure 5: Corona Creek Detention Basin 1.2. PROJECT LOCATION The 10.1 acre (gross area) subdivision area consists of two parcels that each front Corona Road. Each contained a single-family house and outbuildings of an agricultural nature, and each was used as a small chicken farm some decades ago. All structures except for the house at 498 Corona Road, which the applicant intends to retain, were legally removed by a demolition permit issued in November 2005. 470 Corona Road is the southwestern parcel, now vacant, the two palm trees and existing driveway serving as markers of the former house location. 498 Corona Road is the northeastern parcel; contain the existing 1900 era farmhouse. Three parcels adjoin the proposed subdivision along Corona Road. Like the subdivision area, these parcels have not yet been annexed into the City although they have been within the City's Urban Growth Boundary since 1987. To create a regular and logical annexation boundary that is consistent with requirements of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), these three parcels are included in the annexation request. The addresses are 496, 520, and 522 Corona Road (Assessor's Parcels 137-061-007, 008, and 010); each is developed with one house and out buildings and each is approximately one half -acre. The annexation and prezoning site is surrounded by rural residential, diverse agricultural, and residential properties. To the south, west, and east of the proposed subdivision site, within the City, are the Liberty Farms and Corona Creek II single-family subdivisions. With frontage on the project side of Corona Road, to both the west and east are two -acre residential properties, and to the northeast are the three half -acre properties of 496, 520, and 522 Corona Road. Across Corona Road is county land designated for small acreage farming (Diverse Agriculture) and used for rural residential purposes and cattle grazing. The proposed detention basin is northeast of Riesling Road on approximately t4.6 acres. The area is currently an open field with a gradual slope down towards Riesling Road. The detention basin will be constructed on the Urban Separator lands, within the City of Petaluma, northwest of Corona Creek and southeast of the Corona Creek Elementary School ball field. To the northeast are County lands designated as Diverse Agriculture and across Riesling Road to the southwest, within City limits is the Graystone Creek single-family residential subdivision. Page 12 of 79 �3_(� October 24, 2013 1.3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Petaluma is located in southwestern Sonoma County along the 101 corridor approximately 15 miles south of Santa Rosa and 20 miles north of San Rafael. It is situated at the northernmost navigable end of the Petaluma River, a tidal estuary that snakes southward to San Pablo Bay. The City originated along the banks of the Petaluma River, spreading outward over the floor of the Petaluma River Valley as the City developed. The Valley itself is defined by Sonoma Mountain on the northeast and by the hills extending northward from Burdell Mountain on the west. To the south are the Petaluma Marshlands and the San Francisco Bay beyond. Petaluma's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) defines the limits within which urban development may occur and encompasses approximately 9,911 acres. The UGB was implemented in 1987 (as the Urban Limit Line), formally adopted as the UGB in 1998 via Measure I, and will expire in 2025 without subsequent action. The General Plan and EIR evaluated potential impacts associated with existing and proposed development within the UGB. The subject lands proposed for a single-family residential subdivision and annexation have been unused since at least 2005. In the past, the lands contained two residences, numerous outbuildings and were used for agricultural purposes, particularly chickens. The annexation site (including 5 parcels) is located within the UGB, and this project proposes its annexation into the City limits with a related prezoning. The proposed detention basin site is on Urban Separator lands; inside the City limits and at the UGB line. The project is within the North East Planning Area of the General Plan and is part of the Corona/Ely Specific Plan. The North East Planning Area consists of established suburban residential neighborhoods with low building densities and heights. Significant public uses include the Community Center, Lucchesi, Prince, and Leghorns Parks, numerous smaller neighborhood parks, Boys and Girls Club, Santa Rosa Junior College Campus, a public golf course, and numerous schools and churches. Neighborhood commercial is limited to a small shopping center on Sonoma Mountain Parkway. The area is generally flat. There are 28 trees on the subdivision site. Nine are native oak trees. There are five wetland areas together totaling 0.94 acres, 0.87 acres of which are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The 1989 and 2008 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), show the site is outside of the 100 -year floodplain for nearby Corona Creek. FEMA is now processing FIRM revisions (adoption anticipated in February of 2014); the draft FIRMS show most of the annexation area within the floodplain. The subdivision site is within a''/2 -mile of Petaluma's second Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) station as identified in the General Plan (see section 3.16f for further details). Page 13 of 79 October 24, 2013 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation is incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 1: Aesthetics x 7. Greenhouse Gas 13. Population! Housing made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION' will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an 1 Emissions ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially 2! Agricultural &' adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) 8. I Hazards & Hazardous 14. Public Services the effects that remain to be addressed. Forestry Resources because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR' Materials or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or 3: Air Quality x 9. Hydrology I Water x 15. Recreation Quality, 4: Biological Resources -T 10. Land Use / Planning z 16. Transportation 7 Traffic x 5:" Cultural Resources x 11. Mineral Resources 17: UtilitiesY x Service Systems Geology / Soils x 12. Noisez " 18. Mandatory Findings of x Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. 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 X made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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" impact 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 the effects that remain to be addressed. -only 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 EIR' or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigationmeasures that areImposed upon the proposed.project,..nothing further is required. 31/1 Si§ Ure:TiffanyRobbe, enior tanner Date Applica Signature: for Corona Road Associates, L.C.C. Date of 79 24, 2013 is -0 3. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following discussion addresses the potential level of impact relating to each aspect of the environment. 3.1. AESTHETICS Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: P 1 Significant Impact with Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in El ® El area? Sources: 2025 GP and EIR; Updated Tree Report, prepared by HortScience Inc., dated July 2011. Aesthetics Setting: Aesthetic and visual resources in the project area include open space and views of Sonoma Mountain, and agricultural land, to the north and east. Natural elements include Corona Creek to the southeast and trees located on the annexation area, as well as along Corona Road. Elements of the built environment with aesthetic value include the 1900's era farmhouse, which is located at 498 Corona Road and is part of the proposed subdivision site. Figure 6: 1900's Era Farmhouse Source: Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record, Resource # ARS 05-081-01, prepared September 19, 2005. The other 3 existing homes located along Corona Road that are included as part of the proposed annexation would have no impact to aesthetic resources as no changes, modifications or expansions are proposed as part of the subject undertaking. Page 15 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-6 The proposed detention basin site is currently vacant open space that gradually slopes down towards Riesling Road. Looking northeast across the detention basin site are unobstructed views of Sonoma Mountain. Aesthetics Impact Discussion: 3.1(a). Less Than Significant Impact: General Plan 2025 EIR identifies scenic vistas consisting of the hills to the west and south of the City, vistas of Sonoma Mountain, and land along the Petaluma River, notable as viewed from the three public viewpoints of Washington Street overpass, McNear Peninsula, and Rocky memorial Dog Park. The project is not near any of these public viewing points and would not obstruct scenic vistas from them. The GP EIR at page 3.11-5 concludes that infill development (such as the project) would not have a significant effect on the City's scenic vistas if new development is similar in scale and character to existing development. The proposed subdivision (Tentative Subdivision Map) constructed pursuant to the applicable zoning standards will be similar in scale and character to existing development. The subdivision has been laid out so that proposed lot widths are similar to the existing abutting lots following the R1 and R2 zoning pattern by concentrating the half -acre lots closer towards Corona Road and the 6,000+ square foot lots towards the existing subdivisions to the east and south. Since the proposed subdivision will be similar to the existing development in height and massing, as required by the Implementing Zoning Ordinance, it will not substantially_ impact panoramic views or create incongruous visual elements. The project does not involve hillside or riverside development. The proposed subdivision is considered infill development since it is within the Urban Growth Boundary and is adjacent to existing residential development to the east and south. The Sonoma Mountain range ridgeline and foothills are located to the northeast of the subdivision site. Views of the Sonoma Mountain range from the existing residences south of the subdivision site would be affected by the proposed subdivision. In particular, some of the homes in the existing residential subdivision currently back onto the undeveloped parcel and have open views. Although viewshed from these residences will be obstructed by the proposed subdivision development, public views would not be substantially altered, nor would they affect a substantial number of people. The proposed project would result in the development of a residential subdivision similar in scope and character to the existing subdivision adjacent to the project site (east and south), and would not have substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas. As mentioned above, the proposed annexation of the 3 existing lots along Corona Road will have no impacts to scenic vistas as no physical modifications are proposed as part of the subject project. The project includes the development of a detention basin on a currently vacant lot located in the northwest portion of the City's Urban Growth Boundary. Development of the detention basin would result in a visual change to the site, which currently has views of Sonoma Mountain. Improvement to the detention basin site would consist of a 25 -foot wide Urban Separator edge along the frontage of Riesling Road, consistent with the requirements established in the Corona Ely Specific Plan (CESP), and the development of a 4.5 -acre detention basin. The detention basin would be set back 25 feet from the edge of Riesling Road and would be buffered by a 6 foot wide landscape strip, an 8 foot wide multi -use concrete path, and an 11 foot wide landscape strip. A 3 -foot high open fence would separate the detention basin from the new path adjacent to Riesling Road and, as required by the CESP, would prevent vehicular access to the separator. As such, the open space element of the site would largely be retained. Therefore, the detention basin would result in less than significant impacts to scenic vistas. 3.1(b). No Impact: Corona Road transitions from a City Arterial to a County road southwest of the subdivision site. No direct access is taken from Corona Road into the subdivision site. However, the subdivision does have frontage along Corona Road and this roadway serves the 3 existing lots proposed for annexation. As described below under discussion 3.1c, Corona Road is designated as a Scenic Country Corridor. The existing residential development east and south of the proposed subdivision is served by Sonoma Mountain Parkway, which is classified as an Arterial within the City's General Plan. The proposed project, including the subdivision, annexation area, and detention basin, is not visible from any designated state scenic highway. Therefore, the project would have no impact on scenic resources including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings located within a State scenic highway. Page 16 of 79 October 24, 2013 �� �b 3.1(c). Less Than Significant with Mitigation: It has been the City's continuous goal since 1987 (when the Urban Growth Boundary and the Corona Ely Specific Plan were adopted) that Corona Road, northeast of Sonoma Mountain Road, remain a rural country road. All development over the last few decades along this stretch of Corona Road has been limited in size and intensity and new access from Corona Road has been limited. Existing historic -era homes, barns and water tanks have been conditioned to remain. Urban -type street improvements such as street widening, driveways, and traffic signals have not occurred. The vision for a rural country road has been consistently applied throughout the past two decades, and the result is that Corona Road, north of Sonoma Mountain Road, is distinct from roadways within City limits. The Petaluma General Plan 2025 directs that Corona Road remain a rural two-lane road (2-P-104) and that development along this roadway occur only at the City's lowest and seldom used density designation. General Plan policy 2 -P -6A describes this stretch of Corona Road as an entry gateway, with a goal to protect/enhance the cultural landscapes and ecological diversity that is present. Petaluma's Corona Ely Specific Plan identifies this stretch of Corona Road as a Scenic Country Corridor (Figure 4-2) and intended to preserve the existing trees, canopy, older homes, typical rural features, and the overall rural feeling of Corona Road. The proposed subdivision has been designed to be consistent with these policies including the very low density land use and zoning along the Corona Road frontage, as well as that no new driveways or access - - points are proposed from Corona Road. One existing driveway will continue to serve the existing house at 498 Corona Road and one existing driveway will serve the house that will replace the house that was 470 Corona Road. There will be no new driveways off of Corona Road and no roadway improvements or widening of Corona Road in conjunction with the subject undertaking. As such, Corona Road will continue to retain the character of a country road. Therefore, the proposed subdivision and annexation will not significantly affect the rural character of Corona Road. In addition to the rural character, the cultural landscape will also be maintained as further described under section 3.5 below. As proposed, the circa 1900's era small Victorian farmhouse will be preserved (see Mitigation Measure CUL -1 below). The subdivision site contains several trees that serve as visual resources and contribute to the visual character of the area. A Tree Report was conducted for the subject property in 2011 and set forth recommendations for the removal, preservation, and protection of onsite trees. Low value trees (e.g., poor health, non-native) will be removed to facilitate the proposed subdivision development. The two existing Canary Island date palms will be preserved (the arborist rated these in excellent condition and with good suitability for preservation); they serve as a marker of the former house at 470 Corona Road, which was removed prior to 2005. Although the house is no longer present, the preservation of these palms contributes to the character of the site. As such, Mitigation Measure AES -1 ensures preservation of the two existing palm trees that enhance the sense of place and contribute to the rural character of the project site. (Also see the Biological Resources discussion below, Section 3.4). The tree canopy along Corona Road will be maintained, as all healthy trees along Corona Road will remain, as will all native oak trees (see BIO -9 through BIO- 11). While three roadside Lombardi poplars are proposed to be removed due to their very poor form and health (all have extensive trunk decay and two had recent stem failure, they will decline regardless of management), the poplars are thin and upright and are not a significant contributor to the Corona Road tree canopy. They will be replaced by healthy and appropriate species (see AES -2 and BIO -12). The low-density rural feel of Corona Road will be maintained; only two new homes will be sited within 200 feet of Corona Road, each will sit on a %-acre lot, and one of these will replace the home which existed at 470 Corona Road until 2005 (see the Tentative Subdivision Map). The two new homes will be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review to ensure conformity with the stated vision for Corona Road (see AES -3). The houses will only be approved if the Planning Commission finds that the visual character and quality of the project is satisfactory and appropriate. Page 17 of 79 October 24, 2013 (3-17 The proposed subdivision does not include individual house design. Prior to building permit issuance, site plan and architectural review approval is required for the subject subdivision, pursuant to IZO section 24.010. At that time, the proposed height, massing, and architecture of individual home will be reviewed. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the zoning standards of the proposed prezoning to R1 and R2. As proposed, all lots within the RI and R2 zones are greater than 20,000 square feet and 6,000 square feet respectively, consistent with Tables 4.7 and 4.8 of the IZO. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is in keeping with the lot size, arrangement, and density of the existing single-family residential neighborhood to the east and south of the subdivision site. The height parameters, building envelope, and setback requirements established by the IZO ensure that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the existing development in the project vicinity. As described above, the subject subdivision and prezoning has the potential to alter the visual character and quality of the area. In order to ensure that the visual character and quality are preserved, mitigation measures AES -1 through AES -3 shall be implemented. With mitigation measures set forth below (AES -1 through AES -3) and referenced herein (CUL -1 and BIO -12), implementation of the subdivision would not substantially degrade the visual character or quality of the site. Thus, the Project's potential to impact the visual character of the site will be reduced to levels below significance. The proposed annexation of the 3 existing lots will have no impact to the visual character or quality of the area as no physical changes are proposed. The proposed detention basin will alter the visual character of the site. As described above, no buildings or structures are proposed as part of the detention basin design. The open space character of the site will be preserved. The proposed 25 -foot setback from Riesling Road, as well as the addition of the trail, open -style fencing, and landscaping will retain the open space character of the site. In order to ensure that potential impacts due to a change in the visual character of the detention basin site are reduced to levels below significance a detention basin area landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved as part of the public improvement plans. Therefore, within implementation of AES -4 impacts due to a change in the visual character or quality of the detention basin site would be reduced to less than significant levels. 3.1(d). Less Than Significant with Mitigation: The subdivision site is bounded by existing low density residential to the south and east and very low density residential to the north, both of which currently contain lighting and street lighting. Exterior lights installed in conjunction with the residential subdivision will increase artificial light in the vicinity. However, standard conditions of project approval (derived from SPAR standard condition 4D and standard Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee recommendation) require that all exterior lighting be directed onsite and shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent properties. Only low - intensity light standards and/or wall -mounted lights will be used (no flood lights), and lights attached to buildings will provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall in order to avoid direct glare, in accordance with the standard condition. The proposed project is required to conform to Petaluma's Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) § 21.040.D, which specifies lighting standards for all new exterior lighting such as the provision that the cone of direct illumination be sixty degrees if the luminary is greater than 6 feet above the ground. The project has the potential to result in new lighting associated with street lamps and exterior residential lighting that could affect nighttime view in the project area. In addition, headlights from cars entering and exiting the proposed subdivision could introduce new light and glare onsite and along project area roadways. In order to insure that new lighting introduced onsite and in the project vicinity does not constitute a significant effect, development is required to implement Mitigation Measures AES -5 and AES -6 below. AES -5 requires proper screening and building orientation to avoid potential intrusion of headlights from vehicles. AES -6 requires that all exterior lighting is directed onto the project site and access ways, and is shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent properties. Therefore, with mitigation the project's potential to result in increased glare and light will be reduced to levels below significance. Page 18 of 79 October 24, 2013 ) 7 ) Mitigation Measures: AES -1. The Final Map shall note and the Lot 1 and 2 deeds shall include the language to ensure continued preservation of the two palm trees, "Palms 29 and 30 shall be protected and maintained. No construction or pervious surface is permitted within their drip line, expect for the minimum required for construction and maintenance of the asphalt concrete pedestrian/bicycle path. Modifications of a minor nature may be considered by staff after submittal of an arborist report." (The Lot 1 deed need only reference Palm 29, as the Palm 30 dripline does not extend into Lot 1.) AES -2. Prior to improvement plan approval, the landscape architect shall place as many of the BIO -12 replacement trees as practical along Corona Road to enhance the tree canopy; the native coast live oak which occurs on this stretch of Corona Road shall be utilized as well as another canopy species which the landscape architect recommends for the specific site conditions, subject to staff (and the tree committee's) review and approval. AES -3. Prior to building permit issuance of a house or outbuilding within 80 feet of Corona Road at Lots 1 and 2, the structures shall have received site plan and architectural review approval. In addition to the required findings stated in the Zoning Ordinance, findings shall also be made that the proposal is consistent with the CESP's designation of Corona Road as a Scenic Country Corridor (where tree canopy, typical rural features, and the overall rural feeling of Corona Road are preserved) and General Plan policy 2 -P -6A (which describes this stretch of Corona Road as an entry gateway where the intent is to protectlenhance the cultural landscapes and ecological diversity). This measure shall apply as long as GP 2 -P -6A, the Corona Ely Specific Plan Scenic Country Corridor and/or similar policies remain in effect. AES -4. Prior to the approval of the public improvement plans for the detention basin, the applicant shall submit and the City shall approve a detailed landscaping plan showing the tree and ground cover species and specifics, and the design of the planting strip fronting Riesling Road, including the open fence. Staff shall coordinate review of the street trees by the Tree Advisory Committee. AES -5. Building plans shall be designed to avoid and or shield vehicular lighting impacts to bedroom areas and other light-sensitive living areas of any nearby residential lot, home, or facility. Lots proposed at street intersections or in other potentially light-sensitive locations shall incorporate architectural or landscape design features to screen interior living space from headlight glare. AES -6. In order to avoid light intrusion onto adjacent properties, all exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways, and shall be shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent properties. Only low -intensity light standards and/or wall mounted lights shall be used (no flood lights), and lights attached to buildings shall provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall and shall generate no direct glare. Page 19 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 ' 3.2. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Would the project: Impact _ Mitigation Impact p a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as ❑ shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? 01 ❑_ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of ❑ ❑ ❑ forest land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in ❑ ❑ ❑ conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or -- - - - conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Sources: City of Petaluma General Plan Land Use and UGB; and County of Sonoma Land Use and Zoning. Agricultural Setting: Agricultural lands are limited and there are no identified forestlands within the UGB. Agricultural resources are prevalent outside of City limits, within the County of Sonoma. An impetus to the establishment of the UGB was to preserve natural resources, agricultural lands, and other open spaces. The existing zoning on the proposed subdivision and annexation area is Diverse Agriculture under the County of Sonoma's Land Use designation. The proposed prezone would replace this zone with a residential zoning, which is consistent with the existing 3 lots, adjacent uses, and the land use pattern within the UGB. The proposed non -agriculture land use and zoning is consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan, and UGB. Agricultural Resources Impact Discussion: 3.2(a -e). No Impact: There are no forest lands, important farmlands, agricultural resources or agricultural preserves located within the project area including the subdivision, existing lots, and detention basin. The project site is not classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The 2002 Sonoma County Important Farmland map shows the subdivision parcel as "Other Lands," which is defined as land that does not meet the criteria of the previously mentioned categories. As an example, "Other Lands" common include low-density rural development. Historically, 470 and 498 Corona Road were each a small chicken ranch. That use was abandoned by 1970 at 470 Corona Road and likely abandoned in the same period at 498 Corona Road. Currently none of the lands onsite serves as farmland. Page 20 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-2b The subject project site is not under Williamson Act contract. There are no forestlands, timberlands or such zoning on the subject site or vicinity. The proposed project would have no impacts to agricultural resources or forest use, and would not result in the conversion of such lands. Mitigation Measures: None required. 3.3. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria Less Than established by the applicable air quality Potentially Significant Less than No management or air pollution control district may be Significant with Significant Impact relied upon to make the following determinations. Impact Mitigation impact Would the project: - - _. Incorporated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the El® El El air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality ❑ ® ❑ ❑ violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality ❑ ® ❑ ❑ standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ © ❑ ❑ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sources: 2025 GP and EIR; 2010 BAAQMD Clean Air Plan; and BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. Air Qualitv Settin The City of Petaluma is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is regulated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The Federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act establish national and state ambient air quality standards respectively. The BAAQMD is responsible for planning, implementing, and enforcing air quality standards within the Bay Area Air Basin, including the City of Petaluma. The BAAQMD operates several air quality monitoring stations, the closest to the project site is located in downtown Santa Rosa at 5th Street, approximately 15 miles north of Petaluma. The Santa Rosa monitoring station records pollutant concentration levels for carbon monoxide (CO), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM2,5). The Bay Area Air Basin, including the project site, is designated as non -attainment for both the one-hour and eight-hour state ozone standards; 0.09 parts per million (ppm) and 0.070 ppm, respectively. The Bay Area is also in non -attainment for the PMte and PM2,5 state standards, which require an annual arithmetic mean (AAM) of less than 20 pg/m3 for PMto and less than 12 pg/m3 for PM2.5. In addition, the Bay Area Basin is designated as non -attainment for the national 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2,5) standard and will be required to prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for PM2.5. All other national ambient air quality Page 21 of 79 October 24, 2013 standards within the Bay Area Air Basin are in attainment.z Air quality within the Bay Area Air Basin is a combination of natural geographical and meteorological conditions as well as human activities such as construction and development, operation of vehicles, industry and manufacturing, and other anthropogenic emission sources. Petaluma General Plan The City's General Plan set forth policies and programs to maintain and enhance air quality, the following are particularly applicable to the subject Corona Road Subdivision Project: 4-P-6: Improve air quality through required planting of trees along streets and within park and urban separators, and retaining tree and plant resources along the river and creek corridors. 4 -P -15D: Reduce emissions from residential and commercial uses by requiring the following: • Use of high efficiency heating and other appliances, such as cooking equipment, refrigerators, and furnaces, and low NO. water heaters in new and existing residential units; • Compliance with or exceed requirements of CCR Title 24 for new residential and commercial buildings; - - • Incorporation of passive solar building design and landscaping conducive to passive solar energy use for both residential and commercial uses, i.e., building orientation in a south to southeast direction, encourage planting of deciduous trees on west sides of structures, landscaping with drought resistant species, and use of groundcovers rather than pavement to reduce heat reflection; • Encourage the use of battery -powered, electric, or other similar equipment that does not impact local air quality for nonresidential maintenance activities; and • Provide natural gas hookups to fireplaces or require residential use of EPA -certified wood stoves, pellet stoves, or fireplace inserts. 4-P-16: To reduce combustion emissions during construction and demolition phases, the contractor of future individual projects shall encourage the inclusion in construction contracts of the following requirements or measures shown to be equally effective: • Maintain construction equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer's specification for the duration of construction; • Minimize idling time of construction related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment; • Use alternative fuel construction equipment (i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and unleaded gasoline); • Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or particulate filters; • Use diesel equipment that meets the ARB's 2000 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines; • Phase construction of the project; and • Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment. Air Quality Impact Discussion: 3.3(a -c). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan (CAP) in September 2010 to comply with state air quality planning requirements set forth in the California Health & Safety Code, The 2010 CAP serves to update the 2005 Ozone Strategy and provides control strategies to address air quality pollutants including ozone (03), Particulate Matter (PM), toxic air contaminants (TACs), and greenhouse gases (GHGs). Control strategies have been developed for land use, energy and climate, and stationary, transportation, mobile sources. Measures to implement control strategies include the use of clean and efficient vehicles, Green Fleets, enhanced bicycle and pedestrian access, energy 2 "2010 Clean Air Plan," prepared by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, September 2010. Page 22 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-2-2- efficiency, and others. The proposed Project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2010 CAP, which was developed based on land use and growth projections consistent with those used in the City's 2008 General Plan. The project's contribution towards ozone precursors, including NOx and ROG, are further described below. Project Air Quality Screening Air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project would result from short-term construction activities and ongoing operation. In order to assess the project's potential to result in significant air quality impacts the BAAQMD Guidelines, as adopted in 2010 include "screening criteria' that provide a conservative estimate of potentially significant impacts to air quality, were referenced. Although the current 13AAQMD Guidelines deletes the 2010 screening criteria because of the CEQA readoption process required for the agency's Guidelines (see footnote 2 below), the City has determined that it is reasonable to rely on the 2010 screening criteria for purposes of this analysis, because the technical bases for the criteria were not invalidated. If all the screening criteria are met, a detailed quantitative analysis of the project is not required. This is because the screening criteria reflect emissions assumptions for certain types of land uses that BAAQMD found to fall below thresholds for significant impacts. The substantial scientific and technical data underlying the establishment of the BAAQMD criteria and thresholds remains valid for purposes of analyzing CEQA impacts of this project and provides substantial evidence supporting the city's conclusions as to the significance of impacts. Air quality emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), ozone precursors (ROG and NOx) and particulate matter (PM,o and PMZ,$) from construction and operation are evaluated using BAAQMD's 2010 CAP as well as the 2010 CEQA Guidelines.3 Average daily construction emissions in pounds per day (Ib/day), of 54/ROG, 54/1\10„ 82/PM10 (exhaust) and 54/PM2,5 (exhaust) or less are considered less than significant under the 2010 BAAQMD CEQA thresholds. There is no carbon monoxide (CO) emissions threshold applicable to construction emissions. The BAAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for average daily maximum (lbs/day) ROG, NO., PM, (exhaust) and PM2,5 (exhaust) are the same for the long-term (operational) emissions as for construction emissions. For carbon monoxide (CO), the operational significance threshold is 9.0 particles per minute (8 -hour average) and 20.0 ppm (1 -hour average). The screening level thresholds for a single-family development are shown in Table 1 below. Table 1 Operational Related Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Sizes Land Use Type Operational Screening Size Construction Screening Size Single -Family 325 du (NOx) 114 du (ROG) Source: Table 3-1, pg 3-2 Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2010 CEQA Guidelines, May 2010. Construction Emissions Construction related emissions include fugitive dust from site grading and ground disturbance, exhaust from the operation of construction equipment, material delivery trucks, and from workers commuting to and from the project site. Table 1 above shows that the screening level to determine significant air quality impacts from construction of a single-family development is 114 dwelling units. The subdivision portion of the project proposes the development of 30 new units and the preservation of 1 unit (1900's era farmhome), for a total of 31 units, which is well below the screening level. Construction of the proposed Subdivision would have less 3 BAAQMD's 2010 adopted thresholds of significance were challenged in a lawsuit. The court issued a writ of mandate ordering the District to set aside the thresholds and cease dissemination of them until the Air District complies with CEQA. Nonetheless, the City of Petaluma recognizes these thresholds represent the best available scientific data and has elected to rely on these to determining screening levels and significance. On August 13, 2013 the Court of Appeals issued a decision on the lawsuit that upheld the significance threshold. Table 3-1 of the 2010 CEQA Guidelines is used to assess screening levels. Page 23 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-2-37 than significant impact to air quality. The annexation of the existing 3 lots would have no impacts to air quality, as no physical changes are proposed. The project would also allow for construction of the proposed detention basin, within the urban separator, located northeast of Riesling Road and northwest of Corona Creek. The majority of the detention basin site is free of trees and vegetation. As such, grubbing and site clearing would be largely limited to small shrubs and grass. Nonetheless, excavation would result in substantial earthwork. To construct the proposed detention basin, approximately 81,010 cubic yards must be removed if the side slopes are designed at a 2:1 ratio as proposed.4 Using a 24 cubic yard double tractor trailer Super Dump truck, 3,375 one-way truck trips will be needed to haul the soil offsite. Although a reduced slope at a ratio of 5:1 is being investigated, in order to be conservative the Air Quality analysis assumes that 81,010 cubic yards will need to be removed. The subdivision site will be the destination of 5,700 cubic yards of cut, which is located approximately 0.50 miles from the detention basin site. The balance of the cut would be transported offsite. For example, there is an extensive local demand for fill soils at local construction projects such as the Novato Narrows project at Highway 101. It is assumed that the average haul trip destination will be 10 miles round-trip from the detention basin site. Operation of heavy-duty construction equipment as well as soil haul trucks will contribute air quality emissions during construction activities. Table 2 below shows the projected AQ emissions resulting from the construction of the detention basin. Table 2 AQ Emissions from Construction of the Detention Basin (pounds perda CO ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 Unmitigated 34.57 7.15 68.61 1,173.17 247.15 Mitigated 34.57 7.15 49.63 80.69 17.98 Threshold N/A 54.00 54.00 82.00 54.00 Significant? No No No No No Urbemis 2007 9.2.4. Note that emission projections for summer and winter are equivalent. As seen in Table 2 above, the project has the potential to exceed air quality significance thresholds for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, under unmitigated conditions. However, with mitigation measures such as watering disturbed surfaces 3 times per day, use of oxidation catalyst that reduce emissions by 40%, and/or the use of Tier 2 construction equipment, construction -related air quality emissions can be reduced to levels below significance. As such, mitigation measure AQ -3 is required. With implementation of mitigation measures, including AQ -1 through AQ -3, potential impacts to air quality resulting from construction of the proposed detention basin will be reduced to levels below significance. The detention basin construction activity has the potential to result in the generation of fugitive dust from excavation as well as the emission of pollutants from soil haul trucks. In order the ensure that potential air quality impacts associated with the proposed detention basin construction are reduced to levels below significance, Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ -2 as set forth below shall be implemented during construction. The use of Basic Control Measures, as specified under Mitigation Measure AQ -1 below, such as watering the site at least twice daily, covering haul trucks, and maintaining construction equipment, will assure that air quality emissions from construction activities are reduced to levels below significance. AQ -2 specifies truck route limitations for hauling cut in order to reduce potential impacts from diesel exhaust to less than significant levels. Therefore, with implementation of measures AQ -1 through AQ -3, construction of the proposed detention basin would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality management plan and impacts to air quality would be less than significant. 4 Excavation of soils in the amount of 81,010 cubic yards, as shown on the "Preliminary Detention Pond Plans," prepared by Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Inc, March 12, 2013, Page 24 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-74 Operational Emissions The proposed subdivision will result in both stationary and mobile sources of emissions at operation. Although there are no new stationary "point sources" created (large emitters such as manufacturing plants), the project will include small individual "area sources" such as residential furnaces, water heaters and consumer products such as solvents, cleaners, and paints. Most stationary source emissions generated onsite would come from the consumption of natural gas associated with residences. Air quality emissions will also be generated during the operation of vehicles (mobile sources). To a much lesser extent onsite landscaping maintenance will also generate air quality emissions. Table 1 above shows that the operational project level screening size for a single-family development is 325 dwelling units. As a 31 -unit development the proposed subdivision is well below the established screening size. The annexation of the existing 3 lots would have no impacts to air quality as no physical changes are proposed. Operation of the proposed detention basin would not generate air quality emissions as no energy or fuel is necessary for its operation, nor are there any mechanical pumps, or equipment that will be operating on an ongoing basis. Ongoing maintenance of the detention basin has the potential to result in periodic and occasional air quality emissions, which would be well below established thresholds. Therefore, the project would not violate any air quality standard or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant in non -attainment, namely 03, PM1a, and/or PM2,5. It should be noted that the proposed subdivision site is located less than a %-mile (as the crow flies, the distance by sidewalk is still less than a %-mile) from the proposed SMART (Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit) station, which is expected to be operational no sooner than the winter of 2015. Proximity to public transit has the potential to reduce the number of single -occupancy vehicle trips, which would further reduce project generated air quality emissions due to the operation of vehicles. Use of the future SMART station by new residents would further reduce air quality emission generated by the proposed project by replacing single occupancy trips with public transit. The proposed detention basin will not generate air quality emissions at operation. Ongoing maintenance and upkeep will contribute negligible levels of air quality emissions associated with occasional landscaping maintenance and activities associated with maintaining function of the detention basin. Therefore operational air quality emissions generated by the proposed detention basin will be less than significant. 3.3(d). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The subject Project is located in close proximity to sensitive receptors. The subdivision site is adjacent to existing residential development to the east and south, as well as the existing 3 lots proposed for inclusion in the annexation. The proposed ±4.6 acre detention basin is located northeast of existing residences, beyond Riesling Road, and southeast of the Corona Creek Elementary School, with the ball field immediately northwest of the detention basin site. Construction activities associated with development of the subdivision and the detention basin will result in short term air quality emissions that have the potential to affect these nearby sensitive receptors. In order to ensure that air quality emissions associated with short term construction will not result in substantial pollutant concentrations Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ -2 below shall be implemented. Best Management Practices include site watering, proper maintenance of construction equipment, and limiting idling time. These measures assure that potential air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, nearby sensitive receptors would not be adversely impacted by the proposed subdivision or the ±4.6 acre detention basin. At operation, the proposed residential development will not generate air quality emissions that affect sensitive receptors, nor will the proposed ±4.6 acre detention facility. However, new residents onsite have the potential to be exposed to toxic air contaminants released by vehicles traveling along Corona Road. Based on the surface street screening tables for Sonoma County, provided by BAAQMD May 2011, the estimated cancer risk for residents within 50 feet of a north/south trending arterial with 20,000 average daily vehicle trips is 5.86 cases per million and the PM2.5 concentration is 0.171 ug/m3. The screening level for carcinogen, which is an increase of 10 per one million, indicates that the cancer risk is below the significance thresholds. Therefore, air quality emission impacts from vehicle exhaust traveling along Corona Road would have a less than significant impact to new residents onsite. Page 25 of 79 October 24, 2013 � 3 3.3(e). Less Than Significant: As a residential development, the project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Although there may be occasional odors during construction associated with street paving and architectural coating, these are short term in duration and will cease once construction is complete. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impacts to air quality due to objectionable odors. Mitigation Measures: AQ -1. The applicant shall incorporate the Best Management Practices for construction into the construction and improvement plans and clearly indicate these provisions in the specifications. In addition an erosion control program shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Petaluma prior to any construction activity. BMPs shall include but not be limited to the BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures as modified below: 1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered three times per day. 2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material shall be covered. 3. All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. 4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. 5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. 6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. 7._ All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturers specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. 8. Construction equipment staging shall occur as far as possible from existing sensitive receptors. 9. The Developer shall designate a person with authority to require increased watering to monitor issuance of grading permits. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number of designated person and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 10. The City's Public Works Inspector shall perform visual inspections during grading to assure that dust control is implemented and standard BMP are enforced. AQ -2. All construction trucks hauling soils from the detention basin site shall be regulated such that: The following routes are utilized: Route to the subdivision site: Riesling, Fieldstone, Ely, Corona, to site. Route to 101: Riesling, Fieldstone, Ely, Corona; North McDowell, Old Redwood Highway, 101. 2. Hauling trucks shall be prohibited from using neighborhood streets other than Fieldstone to travel to Ely/Corona and shall be kept away from Kenilworth and Corona Creek schools to the full extent possible. Any route alternative must be approved by the City Engineer. 3. Truck trips driving through residential neighborhoods are limited to the hours between 9 am and 3 pm. No weekend/holiday haul trips shall be permitted. Page 26 of 79 October 24, 2013 ' ZG AQ -3. The project applicant shall develop a plan demonstrating that the off-road equipment (more than 50 horsepower) and haul trucks to be used during construction (i.e., owned, leased, and subcontractor vehicles) would achieve a project wide fleet -average that reduces NOx emissions by 40 percent and PM emissions by 15 percent relative to the emission projections set forth per OFFROAD2007 and Emfac2007. Acceptable options for reducing emissions include the use of latest model engines, low - emission diesel products, alternative fuels, engine retrofit technology, after -treatment products, add- on devices such as particulate filters and oxidation catalyst, and/or other options as such become available. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planning Division prior to the approval of the Public Improvement Plan. 3.4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than No Would the project: Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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 regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by El 0 El El the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Formerly 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 plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (formerly Fish and Game) or U.S. 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 limited to, marsh, El 0 El El vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife El El N El corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat El El El N conservation plan? Sources: Holland's Preliminary Descriptions of Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland, 19B6); 2025 General Plan and EIR Figure 3.8-1: Habitat Areas and Special Status Species; Open Space Lands Map of the Petaluma General Plan: Figure 6-1; and Biological Resources Assessment prepared by WRA revised June 2009 and uodated memo for the Detention Basin March 2013. rage L! Or (V October 24. 2013 .� < Biological Resources Setting: Biological resources are protected by statute including the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) affords protection to migratory bird species including birds of prey. These regulations provide the legal protection for plant and animal species of concern and their habitat. As reported in the 2025 General Plan EIR several plant and animal species with special -status have been recorded or are suspected to occur within the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Petaluma. The City of Petaluma Planning Area also contains species that are identified in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) due to rarity and threats, and are considered sensitive resources. Within the Urban Growth Boundary, biological resources are largely limited to the Petaluma River and its tributaries, which contain aquatic and riparian resources as well as wetlands. The National Wetland inventory identifies fresh emergent wetlands in the southern portion of the Petaluma River and Northern coastal salt marsh wetland and brackish marsh wetland in the lower reaches of the Petaluma River. The Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan, prepared in 1996, contains policies and guidelines to protect these important biological resources. The subdivision site is approximately 10.1 acres; it is nearly flat and previously partially developed. All structures except the house at 498 Corona Road were removed in 2005. In part due to its past use and development, the Corona Road Subdivision site does not contain valuable habitat. Vegetation on the subdivision site consists of weedy (ruderal) grassland typical of vacant lots in heavily disturbed areas. As further described below, a portion of the Subdivision site contains 0.87 acres of Section 404 wetlands and 0.07 acres of Non -Section 404 isolated wetlands. The balance of the annexation area, consisting of 3 single- family lots along Corona Road, contains non -sensitive plant communities and is void of wetlands. The detention basin site is comprised of ruderal vegetation and has limited biological resources. The proposed subdivision, 3 existing lots that are part of the annexation area, and the ±4.6 detention facility have low biological resource value due to fragmentation and surrounding urban development including roads, schools, and residential neighborhoods. Nonetheless, there are remnant biological resources that will be impacted as well as adjacency considerations to the riparian corridor associated with Corona Creek. As further described below, without proper mitigation the project has the potential to result in significant impacts to biological resources including jurisdictional and non -jurisdictional wetlands and sensitive species. Biological Resources Impact Discussion 3.4(a). Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation: The subject subdivision, 3 existing lots, and detention basin sites are located on the edge of the UGB. Site-specific biological field investigations were prepared for the subject project. The Biological Resources Assessment prepared by WRA, June 2009, found that fifty-nine special status species of wildlife have been recorded in the vicinity of the annexation area. The Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B) summarizes the potential for occurrence of these species, which finds that 48 species are not likely to ever be present, 9 wildlife species have a low potential for occurrence, 2 bat species have a moderate potential of occurrence and no species have a high potential for occurrence. The two bat species that have a moderate potential for occurrence are the Pallid Bat (Antrozous pallidus) and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), which are both CDFW Species of Special Concern. A vacant house onsite provides potential roosting habitat; although the doors and windows have been boarded up with plywood, small gaps still exist that could allow bats to come and go freely and the house could provide roosting habitat for bat species. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1 below ensures bat protection and the reduction of a potentially significant impact to bat species to levels below significance. As noted, 9 special status wildlife species were noted to have a low potential for occurrence within the annexation area. The predominant reason these species were determined to have a low occurrence potential was due to the lack of suitable habitat, also see Appendix B to the Biological Resources Assessment (2009). For example, there is a low potential for occurrence of the California Tiger Salamander (CTS; Ambystoma californiense), Federal Endangered in Sonoma County, CDFW Species of Special Concern, CDFW proposed Endangered; there are no essential habitat features onsite and the nearest occurrence is more than two miles Page 28 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 -L�I 66 LQ from the project area. The California Red -legged Frog (CRLF; Rana draytonii) is Federal Threatened and a CDFW Species of Special Concern. While there are occurrences of CRLF within five miles of the site, there is no suitable breeding or estivation habitat present on the site and neither the proposed subdivision nor the detention basin site are within Critical Habitat of the CRLF, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Forty special status plant species were identified in the literature search as having been documented in the general vicinity of the annexation area. Field surveys of onsite habitat concluded that no plant species have a moderate or high potential for occurrence, and that three species have a low potential for occurrence within seasonal wetlands. The onsite wetlands identified have low potential to support these sensitive plant species because they are man-made and isolated from suitable habitat. The remaining 37 species are not likely to be present because the site lacks the specific habitat requirements of these species. No sensitive plant species were identified during field surveys and thirty-six common plant species typical of the locale were observed. Therefore, no protocol -level rare plant surveys are recommended and potential project impacts to sensitive plant communities would be less than significant. A Biological Resources memorandum (Appendix C) regarding the detention basin area prepared by WRA and dated March 25, 2013 found that, due to human disturbance and the lack of tidal marshes, the site offers limited value for special status plant and wildlife species. Corona Creek, however, may support amphibians and reptiles, particularly the western pond turtle in areas of standing water. No records of California red - legged frog occur within this region of Petaluma and the detention basin site is outside the mapped critical habitat for this species. In addition, the site is south of the known range for the Santa Rosa population of the California tiger salamander. No records of steelhead are known for any reach of Corona Creek. Given that Corona Creek has the potential to support western pond turtle and to avoid any potential impacts, mitigation measure BI0-2 below requires that preconstruction surveys be conducted for the western pond turtle. BIO -8 below further requires that construction activities of the detention basin be limited to periods when no water is flowing within Corona Creek. Adherence to these mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to western pond turtles to levels below significance. As a currently undeveloped lot, there is a potential that the subdivision site and/or detention basin site is occasionally used for foraging by protected bird species such as falcons and hawks. Adherence to General Plan Policy 4-P-3 as well as California Department of Fish and Game Code Section 3503 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META) will assure that potential impacts to migratory bird species are avoided. In order to protect migratory bird nests, should construction activities occur within the breeding season between February 15Th and September 1" a pre -construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, as required pursuant to mitigation measure BIO -3 below. With implementation of mitigation measure BIO -3, potential impacts to nesting migratory birds will be reduced to less than significant levels. With implementation of mitigation measures BI0-1 through BI0-3 and 13I0-8 below, the proposed project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a threatened, endangered, candidate, sensitive, or special status, including those regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (formerly Fish and Game) and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, impacts to biological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels. 3.4(b -c). Less Than Significant with Mitigation: The Biological Resources Assessment prepared by WRA, found that the majority of both the subdivision and detention basin sites are composed of ruderal fields, a non - sensitive plant community. Ruderal fields tend to be dominated by weedy non-native plant; such plant species observed include Italian ryegrass, common knotweed (Polygonum arenastrum), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), bristly ox -tongue, and hayfield tarweed (Hemizonia congesta). The Assessment identified one sensitive plant community, seasonal wetlands, located within the proposed subdivision site. The project biologist, WRA, has worked with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to verify the extent of wetlands within the subdivision site (SPN-2006-400050-N). An April 13, 2012 letter from the WRA biologist to the Army Corps memorializes their site visit together and the preliminary Army Corps direction on the Section 404 jurisdictional areas. Page 29 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-29 A total of 0.94 acres of seasonal wetlands are present onsite, including 0.87 acres of federal jurisdictional Section 404 "Waters of the U.S.," and 0.07 acres of isolated wetlands that are Non -Section 404 wetlands. All wetlands identified onsite (0.94 acres) are considered to be "waters of the state" and therefore are regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In order to mitigate for potential impacts to these isolated and seasonal wetlands, BI04 is required. In addition, the project requires a 404 Individual Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for potential fill to waters of the U.S. and a 401 certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board for potential impacts under the Porter Cologne Act. Mitigation Measure BI0-4 specifies purchasing wetland mitigation bank credits at a preliminarily mitigation ratio of 1:1 to offset potential impacts to seasonal and isolated wetlands onsite. A ratio of 1:1 is proposed given the limited value and function of the seasonal and isolated wetlands present on the subdivision site. A Biological Survey was also completed for the detention basin and pursuant to WRA's memorandum, based on the disturbed nature of the detention basin site, no sensitive plant species are expected to be present. However, a portion of the grading plan for the inlet/outlet does occur within the Corona Creek flow lines and therefore requires a 1600 Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Willow (Salix sp), which is considered a riparian species, occurs along the edges of Corona Creek and has the potential to be affected from construction of the proposed detention basin and tie in to Corona Creek (inlet/outlet). As such, a Streambed Alteration Agreement will be required from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, pursuant to Mitigation Measure 13I0-5. Implementation of BIO -5 will ensure that potential impacts to riparian species are reduced to levels below significance. At the location of the proposed detention basin's inlettoutlet to Corona Creek, a jurisdictional determination shall be conducted pursuant to BI0-6, for "waters of the United States" and the top of bank or the outer edge of the riparian vegetation (as determined by the dripline) for Corona Creek. In the event that the tie in (inlettoutlet) would impact jurisdictional waters, BIO -6 would ensure that mitigation bank credits are purchased to offset potential impacts, which would reduce impacts to levels below significance. Preliminary design for the inlet/outlet of the detention basin indicates that up to 500 square feet (40 linear feet) of jurisdictional waters may be impacted. To ensure that potential impacts associated with the detention basin's inlet/outlet tie in are reduced to levels below significance Measure BI0-7 provides for replanting of disturbed riparian vegetation at a ratio of 3:1. Furthermore, all work in Corona Creek shall be done when water is not flowing, pursuant to mitigation measure BI0-8. If flowing water is present, it shall be diverted around the work area. Should grading or fill occur within "waters of the United States", a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act would be required and authorization obtained from the Corps for such activity. With implementation of mitigation measures BIO -1 through BIO -8, the project will have a less than significant impact on riparian habitats, sensitive natural communities, and areas protected under the Clean Water Act. 3.4(d). Less Than Significant Impact: There is no evidence of migratory wildlife corridors or nursery sites on the subdivision site or the detention basin site. The two-lane Corona Road is a barrier to through movement. The Biological Resources Assessment concluded that the residential development on three sides of the subdivision site makes the site relatively inaccessible to many species, and eliminates the possibility of the site functioning as a movement corridor. Development of the proposed Subdivision and detention basin will not substantially interfere with the movement of fish or other wildlife species including migrating species. The project is located at the edge of the City's urban growth boundary and will not result in new or increased impacts to wildlife species movement. The project will have less than significant impacts to wildlife corridors and species movements. 3.4(e). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: Petaluma's Municipal Code, Chapter 17, addresses Tree Preservation and requires the preservation of existing tree in all development proposals (17.050). A site specific Tree Report, was prepared by HortScience, Inc in August of 2006 and an Update Tree Report was prepared in July 2011, (Appendix A). The Tree Preservation Report consists of an inventory of trees onsite, an evaluation of their health and value, and a recommendation to preserve, remove, or transplant species. The Tree Report identifies the protected trees onsite, recommends preservation of high value trees and calls for the removal and replacement of several trees in poor health. Page 30 of 79 October 24, 2013 ) - 30 The Updated Tree Report determined that of the 35 trees initially surveyed 28 trees remained onsite within the proposed subdivision parcel (7 of the trees were removed between 2005 and 2011). Five of the remaining trees are located within the right of way along Corona Road (#1, and #23 - #26), one is the Monterey cypress (#34) growing on the western fence line, and three are oak trees (#5 - #7) growing along the eastern fence line. The other 19 are located within the subject subdivision parcel. Petaluma defines native oak species with diameters of 4 -inches or greater, California buckeye 6 -inches in diameter and greater, California bay 12 -inches in diameter and greater, coast redwoods 18 -inches and greater, and right-of-way trees as Protected. Based on this definition there are nine Coast live oaks (trees #1 — #8 and #23), two of which are right-of-way trees (#1 and #23) that classify as Protected. The subdivision requires mitigation to assure that the nine protected oak trees are preserved. Mitigation Measure BIO -9 requires the protection of protected trees via the establishment of a Tree Protection Zone during construction. Mitigation Measure BIO -10 requires a deed restriction along the right of way for the long-term protection of these oak trees and to ensure that future landowners continue to preserve these protected trees. Mitigation Measure BIO -11 ensures compliance with Zoning section 17.060F, requiring a security deposit for the nine protected trees during the construction period. With implementation of BIO -9 through BIO -12 below, potential impacts to the 9 protected Coast live oaks will be reduced to less than significant levels. Three Lombardy poplars (#24 — #26) also qualify as Protected pursuant to the IZO, because of their location within the right -of way. These poplars are in poor condition; all have extensive trunk decay and #25 and #26 -- ----- -- have recently experienced stem failures. As described in the Tree Report all three poplars are expected to decline regardless of management. Pursuant to IZO section 17.065A.3.c.1 trees in poor health, as determined by the project arborist, are not required to be replaced. Mitigation Measure BIO -12, in accordance with Zoning section 17.065A2 and A.3.c.3, requires appropriate two to one trunk diameter mitigation of the marginal trees. That is, a total of thirty 24 -inch box replacement trees are required. With mitigation, impacts due to removal of protected poplar trees in poor condition are reduced to level below significance. The site also contains sixteen non -protected trees, which were also assessed as part of the arborists report. Five of these non -protected trees will be removed (walnut #13, small redwood #15, cherry #28, elm #31, and locust #33), because they are within an area to be graded for the development. Four of these five are in poor condition (#15, #28, #31, and #33) and expected to decline regardless of management. The proposed planting of the street trees (sheet TM -12) will compensate for the canopy loss of these trees, thus the project is compliant with the intent of Zoning section 17.010. Therefore, with mitigation measures BIO -9 through BIO -12, all healthy, protected trees will be preserved and the project's impacts due to conflict with a tree preservation ordinance would be reduced to levels below significance. 3.4(f). No Impact: There is no Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other regional, or state habitat conservation plan that exists for Petaluma, which would regulate the proposed development on this parcel. Development of the Project will not conflict with any adopted biological resource plan. Therefore, the Project will have no impacts to biological resource management plans, conservation plan, or their implementation. Mitigation Measures BIO -1. In order to avoid the bat maternity and/or bat hibernation periods and ensure protection of any bat species potentially present in the 1900's era farmhouse, work done at the 498 Corona Road house before it is again inhabited shall be conducted between September 1 st and October 30th. Should the applicant propose to commence renovation outside this time frame, a qualified biologist shall first perform a bat roost survey inside the house to determine if there is evidence of bat use (guano accumulation, acoustic or visual detections). If no evidence is found, renovation of the house must commence within one month of the bat roost survey or be re -surveyed within one month of renovation activities. If evidence of bat use is found, CDFW shall be contacted for guidance on exclusion methods or methods to allow the bats to passively leave the building. Exclusion methods typically include covering openings with a netting or tubing flap that allow bats. to exit, but not re-enter. BIO -2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the detention basin, results of a preconstruction survey, Page 31 of 79 t3_31 October 24, 2013 conducted by a qualified biologist for the western pond turtle shall be provided to the building department. The pre -construction survey for western pond turtles shall be conducted no more than 30 days prior to construction of the detention basin. Surveys shall be conducted in suitable aquatic habitats, namely along the stretch of Corona Creek adjacent to the detention basin site. A combination of visual and trapping surveys may be performed with authorization from the CDFW. If occupied habitat can be avoided, an exclusion zone shall be established around the habitat via temporary plastic fencing that creates a buffer area. Signs on the outside of the fence area that note "Sensitive Habitat Area" shall be clearly visible. If avoidance is not possible, the biologist, with approval from CDFW may capture and relocate turtles in accordance with USFWS and CDFW requirements to suitable habitat a minimum of 300 feet downstream of the project area and any recommendation by the biologist shall be satisfied. For the duration of the construction work the biologist shall conduct monthly follow-up visit to monitor effectiveness. 13I0-3. To prevent impacts to migratory birds covered by State and federal law (California Department of Fish and Game Code and the MBTN, the applicant shall avoid the removal of trees, shrubs, or weedy vegetation between February 15 and September 1", during the bird nesting period. If no vegetation or tree removal is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys are required. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a pre -construction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than seven days prior to the removal of trees. Survey results shall be valid for the tree removals for 21 days following the survey. If the trees are not removed within the 21 -day period then a new survey shall be conducted. In the event that an active nest is discovered in the trees or areas to be cleared, tree removal, clearing and construction shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until the biologist has determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts, whichever is later. BI0-4. To offset impacts to the 0.94 acres of Section 404 Waters of the US and Non -Section 404 Water, credits shall be purchased from an approved mitigation bank at a ratio of one acre for every one acre impacted, or as otherwise directed by regulatory agencies. The ratio of 1:1 is proposed given the low - quality habitat of the onsite seasonal and isolated wetlands. The applicant shall provide proof of purchase of credits and notification to the City and regulatory agencies. BI0-5. Grubbing and grading for the detention basin shall avoid removal of riparian tree species. In the event that avoidance is infeasible, then disturbed willow trees shall be replaced at a ratio of 1:1 or as deemed appropriate by the 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement with the CDFW. Areas temporarily disturbed by construction of the detention basin shall be revegetated with shade species compatible with the Petaluma River region. 13I0-6. Where the inlet/outlet of the detention basin adjacent to Corona Creek is proposed, a jurisdictional determination for "Waters of the United States' and the top of bank or the outer edge of the riparian vegetation (as determined by the dripline) for Corona Creek shall be conducted prior to approval of grading plan. In the event that impacts to Water of the U.S. would result from the detention basin tie in (inlet/outlet), then mitigation credits shall be purchased prior to issuance of grading permit to offset impacts at a ratio of 3:1 or as deemed appropriate by the Corps. BI0-7. The outlet from the detention basin to Corona Creek shall be designed to minimize impacts to riparian vegetation and the natural stream bottom. To offset impacts to the approximately 500 square feet (40 linear feet) of Section 404 Waters of the US and Non -Section 404 Waters, the area around the outlet and upstream of the creek shall be planted with riparian vegetation at a ratio of 3:1 for linear impacts or as deemed appropriate by the RWQCB, CDFW, and/or ACOE. BI0-8. All work in Corona Creek shall be done when water is not flowing. BI0-9. A Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) shall be established at the dripline around each tree to be preserved. The TPZ shall be enclosed by a 6 -foot tall chain link fence during construction. No ground disturbance including the placement of utilities or sub drains shall occur within the Tree Protection Zone. Tree preservation notes shall be included on all plans. BI0-10.The Final Tract Map shall note and the Lot 6 deed shall include the following language to ensure Page 32 of 79 October 24, 2013 1.3-3Z continued preservation of the nine protected oak trees, "Oaks 1 through 8 and 23 shall be protected and maintained. No construction or pervious surface is permitted within their drip line. Modifications of a minor nature may be considered by staff after submittal of an arborist report". BIO -11. Prior to commencement of grading, a security deposit for the nine protected trees (oaks 1-8 and 23) shall be posted to cover the value of protected trees for preservation during the construction process, pursuant to Zoning section 17.060F. BIO -12. Prior to improvement plan approval, replacement trees equaling a total of 60 -inches of replacement trunk diameter shall be shown on said plan (a total of thirty 24 -inch box or the equivalent pursuant to Zoning section 17.065 A.3.c.3). Half of the total replacement species shall be the native coast live oak. (See also AES -2.) The improvement plan shall also note that the replacement trees will become protected trees pursuant to 17.030. 3.5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would thero ect: P 1 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact --No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ® n ❑ significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the El El Z significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique El El El 0 paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 11 0 El El Sources: Petaluma General Plan 2025 Chapter 3: Historic Preservation; 2025 GP EIR: CEQA Guidelines 15064.5; Cultural Resources and Historic Structures Evaluation prepared by Archaeological Resource Services. June 2009_ Cultural Resources Setting: Historic resources are central to Petaluma culture and contribute greatly to the aesthetic quality and character of the City. During prehistoric times, drawn by the fertile soils and abundant wildlife, the Coast Miwok Indians settled in the Petaluma River Valley. European settlement began in the 1800s and increased after the discovery of gold. The California Historical Resources Information System identifies a number of Native American archaeological resources sites and historic era cultural resources within the UGB. Petaluma contains 3 Historic Districts (Oakhill -Brewster, Downtown, and A -Street Historic Districts) located in the southwest portion of the City's UGB. The Historic Preservation Chapter of the General Plan includes policies and programs to protect the City's historic and cultural resources throughout the City. General Plan Goal 3-P-1 is: Identify, recognize, and protect Petaluma's unique and irreplaceable cultural heritage. Policy 3-P-1 D is: Require and/or encourage designation of local landmarks. Page 33 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-33 Although not located within any of the City's designated historic districts, the subject subdivision parcel contains a circa 1900 small Victorian farmhouse at 498 Corona Road. Figure 4-2 of the Corona Ely Specific Plan identifies this house as one of the "Distinctive Country Homes and Farmsteads' along the east side of Corona Road. No other historic or cultural resources were identified onsite. A Section 106 consultation consistent with SB 18 was conducted in 2006 and one response letter was received. The letter noted that the tribe did not have any information regarding prior habitation, cultural resources, or sacred resources onsite.5 Cultural Resources Impact Discussion 3.5(a). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: As mentioned, the subdivision site is not located within any of the designated historic districts, but does contain a 1900 era farmhouse, which is identified as having historic value in the Cultural and Historic Evaluation Report. The proposed subdivision does not pose a threat to the existing historic resource, as new development would be located to the east of the existing historic house and would not hinder views from Corona Road to the farmhouse. The proposed subdivision preserves the existing 1900's era farmhouse, retains large lots along Corona Road, and does not introduce new driveways. Therefore, the project would not interfere with the remaining Distinctive Country Homes and Farmsteads along Corona Road. While the house has several additions, there is an overall Victorian farmhouse appearance. The associated outbuildings have been removed and the property has lost its integrity as a farm. While the house does not appear eligible for listing to the California Register, the Corona Ely Specific Plan (page 44) cites the older country homes along Corona Road as one of the primary contributors to Corona Road's special character. The 1900's era farmhouse to be preserved onsite has integrity of location, feeling, workmanship, and setting. It has not been moved, it has an older house appearance and the setting along Corona Road has remained much the same, although the property setting has changed since ancillary structures have been removed. However, the removal of the ancillary structures is not obvious from Corona Road. The workmanship is basic, but it has not been compromised. While the house has undergone some modification and had some additions, it retains some of the original integrity of design and materials. The crucial elements of the front gable with the fish scale shingles on the hipped roof combine to form the most important architectural component. The addition at the northwest comer on the front of the house appears to be old enough to be considered an important part of the house and does not detract from the historic nature of the eastern side. It is notable that it is not original, but has significant age on its own. It contributes to the house, but would not be individually eligible. The other original design elements include the small covered porch area with scroll brackets, the clapboard siding, and the window surrounds. As for materials, some have been severely compromised, but not beyond repair. In 2005, it was evident that the original wooden windows had been replaced with aluminum sashed or vinyl sashed elements; currently all windows and doors are covered with plywood. Some of the 8 -inch horizontally wood clapboard siding has been removed from the east side of the house, and some of the scroll brackets are missing from the eastern post of the entry porch. The house does not have integrity of association, as the outbuildings have been removed and the property is not associated with any historic places, persons, or events. While the structure does not appear eligible for the California Register, it contributes to the general historic feeling of older farmhouses along Corona Road, as stated in the Corona Ely Specific Plan. Preservation of this structure is recommended based on local concern. As described in the Cultural Resources Report, Heritage Homes of Petaluma noted that the house "is a contributor to a cohesive collection of small historic farm complexes and buildings that make Corona Road an important link to Petaluma's agricultural past." Heritage Homes also found that there has been a rapid reduction in the number of older farmhouses in this area in the recent past, and retention of remaining structures is encouraged. 5 "SB 18 Consultation," Nick Tipon, Sacred Site Protection Committee, Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, July 29, 2006. Page 34 of 79 13-34 October 24, 2013 As such, the Cultural and Historic Resources Report concludes that the 1900's era farmhouse has a special value as a local landmark. Therefore, it is appropriate for the home to be subject to the Secretary of Interior Standards so that it continues to be eligible for designation as a local landmark. The 19OO's era farmhouse has a special character and value making local designation as an important historic resource appropriate. In order to protect this local historic resource and preserve the cultural character of Corona Road, the applicant shall secure designation for 498 Corona Road as a local historical landmark, see CUL -1. To ensure that the 1900 era farmhouse does not suffer "demolition by neglect," CUL -2 requires basic rehabilitation work prior to the issuance of condition of occupancy for the proposed subdivision. With implementation of CUL -1 and CUL -2, onsite historic resources would be preserved and the project potential to impacts such resources would be reduced to levels below significance. The approach to rehabilitating is to re -use original materials, where possible, and use in-kind materials when replacement is necessary. The Secretary of interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties within Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, & Reconstructing Historic Buildings will be applied to the rehabilitation of the 498 Corona Road. With the rehabilitation and designation of the 1900 era farmhouse, impacts to historic resources, including locally significant resources will be less than significant. 3.5(b). No Impact: The City of Petaluma has a rich archeological history due to the presence of the Coast Miwok Indians during prehistoric times. As such, undisturbed lands within the Urban Growth Boundary, particularly lands in the vicinity of ridgetops, midslope terraces, alluvial flats, ecotones, and sources of water have a greater possibility of encountering a prehistoric archaeological resource. The subject site is not located within any areas of elevated potential for the occurrence of archeological resources. Furthermore, standard conditions of approval will be imposed on the Project requiring that if any archeological/historical remains are encountered during grading, all construction work shall be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the artifacts identified and recommend further action. The proposed project does not appear to pose a threat to local archaeological resources. No prehistoric or historic artifacts or cultural soils were encountered during the surface inspection of the subdivision site. There does not appear to be the potential for archaeological deposits at the subdivision site or the detention basin site, based on a review of cultural studies conducted in the project area. A standard condition of approval will be imposed on the project requiring that should any archeological features (such as concentrations of artifacts or culturally modified soil deposits, including humanly modified stone, shell, bone, or other cultural materials such as charcoal, ash, and burned rock indicative of food procurement or processing activities or prehistoric domestic features include hearths, firepits, or house floor depressions or of human skeletal remains) and historic artifacts (potentially including trash pits and all by-products of human land use greater than 50 years of age) be encountered during grading, all work shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted immediately to make an evaluation and recommend further action. Thus, the project is not expected to cause changes, which would affect ethnic or cultural values, affect religious uses, or result in adverse physical or aesthetic impacts to a historic archaeological resource. Therefore, the project is not expected to cause substantial changes to a historic archaeological resource. 3.5(c). No Impact: The proposed subdivision and detention basin will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or geologic feature. The UGB, including the subject project site, is not known to contain any paleontological resources. The project site is relatively flat, void of rock outcropping, and does not contain other unique geological features. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will have no impact to unique paleontological or geologic resources. 3.5(d). Less Than Significant with Mitigation: The project site is not known to contain any human remains, including those interred outside of a cemetery. In the event that human remains are discovered during excavation of the site or during any stage of construction, all requirements of state law shall be complied with, including requirements that the county Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission be contacted to arrange for Native American participation in determining the disposition of such remains should they be determined to be Native American. Adherence to these requirements as specified under Mitigation Measure CUL -3 below, will assure that the subject project has less than significant impacts to human remains. Page 35 of 79 October 24, 2013 (3-35 Mitigation Measures: CUL -1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the subject subdivision, the 1900 era farmhouse that is part of the subdivision and within the proposed annexation area shall be rehabilitated and refurbished by retaining and reusing original materials as possible and replacing missing or distressed materials with matching materials. The Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties within Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings shall be utilized during all rehabilitation efforts. CUL -2. As set forth in the Historic Report Evaluation and to ensure consistency with the General Plan Goal 3-P- 1 and CESP Program 24, the farmhouse at 498 Corona Road shall be designated as a Local Historic Landmark. The particular features of the landmark which are to be preserved shall include the front - facing pedimented lower cross gable sided with fish scale shingles, the primary hipped roof, the small covered porch area with scroll brackets replication in-kind and replacement of missing scroll brackets at the eastern post of the entry porch, the 8 -inch horizontal clapboard siding, and the window surrounds. Corona Road facing windows that are not wood shall be replaced in the original openings with wood -sashed double -hung single -light windows. Windows on any other elevation that need replacing shall also be wood -sashed double -hung single -light window (or awning, fixed, etc. should - - an original hole size direct such). - CUL -3. In the event that human remains are uncovered during earthmoving activities, all construction excavation activities shall be suspended and the following measures shall be undertaken: 1. The Sonoma County Coroner shall be contacted. 2. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. 3. The project sponsor shall retain a City -approved qualified archaeologist to provide adequate inspection, recommendations and retrieval, if appropriate. 4. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American, and shall contact such descendant in accordance with state law. 5. The project sponsor shall be responsible for ensuring that human remains and associated grave goods are reburied with appropriate dignity at a place and process suitable to the most likely descendent. Page 36 of 79 October 24, 2013 3.6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact P _. _.. _..... .......Incorporated 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 or based on ❑ ❑ El other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Publication 42. ii. Strong Seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ liquefaction? iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss 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 on or off-site ❑ ® ❑ ❑ landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating El ® El El risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for ❑ ❑ ❑ the disposal of waste water? Sources: Petaluma General Plan 2025: Chapter 10.1 Natural Hazards, and Figures 3.7-2 (Local Geology), 3.7-4 (Ground Shaking Intensity), 3.7-5 (Geological Hazards); Soils Investigation Report by Giblin Associates dated March 2006; and Soil Engineering Consultation And Soil Investigation Report update by Reese & Associates Consulting Geotechnical Engineers dated July 28 2011 and April 9 2013. Geology and Soils Setting The City of Petaluma lies within a seismically active region. It is in California Building Code (CBC) Seismic Zone 4, and as such new development is required to meet the most stringent CBC standards. Geologic hazards within the City of Petaluma are largely related to seismic ground shaking and associated effects such as liquefaction, ground failure, and seismically induced landslides. Principal faults in the vicinity of Petaluma are capable of generating large earthquakes that could produce strong to violent ground shaking. The Rodgers Creek Fault is located less than 5 miles to the northeast. Although branches of the Rodgers Creek closest to the City are not historically active (within the last 200 years), they do show evidence of activity during the last 11,000 years, which is a relatively short time in terms of geologic activity. Expansive soils and soil erosion are also of concern within the City of Petaluma. Page 37 of 79 13--37 October 24, 2013 Expansive soil materials occur in the substrate of the clays and clayey loams in the City and represent a potential geologic hazard. Without proper geotechnical considerations, buildings, utilities and roads can be damaged by expansive soils due to the gradual cracking, settling, and weakening of older buildings. These effects create safety concerns and risk of financial loss. To reduce the risks associated with expansive soils, the City's Building Code, Chapter 18, requires that each construction site, intended for human occupancy, that is suspected of containing expansive soils be investigated and the soils be treated to eliminate the hazard. As such, a site-specific Soils Investigation was prepared on March 2006 and updated on July 28, 2011. Findings from these site-specific geotechnical investigations are further discussed below. Geo(ogV and Soils Impact Discussion: 3.6(a. i.). No Impact: The project site (subdivision, existing lots, and detention basin) is not located within an Alquist-Paolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known active faults traverse the site. Rodgers Creek fault is approximately 4.2 miles to the northeast and the San Andreas Fault is approximately 15.2 miles to the southwest. Therefore, there is no risk of fault -related ground rupture during earthquakes within the limits of the site due to a known Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone. 3.6(a. if). Less Than Significant Impact: As is the case throughout the City's UGB, development of the subject subdivision and annexation has the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking. The project site is located within zone IX -Violent of the Mercalli Intensity Shaking Severity Level. In the event of a magnitude 7.1 earthquake, the project area and the City of Petaluma could experience severe groundshaking that could damage buildings, structures, infrastructure and result in the risk of loss of life or property. Conformance with standards set forth in the Building Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2 (the California Building Code 3.7-20 Chapter 3: Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures [CBC]) and the California Public Resources Code, Division 2, Chapter 7.8 (the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act) will assure that potential impacts from seismic shaking are less than significant. Based on review of the subdivision site and Section 1613, "Earthquake Load," the CBC parameters for a Site Class D shall be utilized to assure that potential impacts from seismic activity are less than significant. Site Class D requirements include recommendations for foundation types, appropriate structural systems, and ground stabilization strategies. With utilization of Class D specifications, the proposed Subdivision would not expose a substantial number of people or structures to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact resulting from seismic activity. There will be no change to the existing 3 lots proposed for inclusion in the annexation. Therefore there are no new or increased risks due to the proposed prezoning. The proposed detention basin has the potential to be subject to strong ground shaking. Seismic induced failure of the detention basin could result in localized flooding similar to the existing condition. The intent of the proposed detention basin is to reduce the flooding hazard in the project area and provide protection against the 100 -year flood. The detention basin would not introduce a substantial risk beyond what is present today. Therefore, the detention basin would have a less than significant impact associated with the risk of loss, injury, or death. 3.6(a. iii -iv). No Impact: The project site is outside of the areas identified as high and very high for the potential of liquefaction pursuant to the General Plan EIR, Figure 3.7-5, Geologic Hazards. Based on the results of field and laboratory date, the Soils Investigation Report concludes that the sandy soils encountered below a depth of about 3'/ feet are sufficiently dense and contain significant quantities of fine material, such that the risk of liquefaction and densification can be considered low. As a relatively flat site, the potential for seismic -related ground failure, including landslides is low. The proposed project (subdivision, annexation and detention basin) would not expose a substantial number of people or structures to adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from liquefaction and/or landslides. Therefore, the project would have no impact due to risks associated with liquefaction and/or landslides. Page 38 of 79 October 24, 2013 B - 3 & 3.6(b). Less Than Significant with Mitigation: The 3 existing lots proposed for annexation will not impact topsoils or result in soil erosion as no physical improvements are proposed. However, development of the subdivision site and construction of the detention basin has the potential to disturb topsoil and result in soil erosion during site preparation and grading activities. Soils within the UGB, including the project site, are medium grained Holocene alluvium. Topsoil would be impacted at the subdivision site due to ground disturbance and the removal of fill material, which is recommended to a depth at least 18 inches. Without proper construction control measures, this level of disturbance has the potential to result in soil erosion. Similarly, construction of the detention basin will impact topsoils during site preparation, grading, and excavation, which is required to a maximum depth of 14 feet. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 and GEC -2, set forth below, require the applicant to submit an Erosion Control Plan that identifies measures to be implemented during construction and limits grading activity during the raining season. Implementation of GEO-1 would reduce any effects from erosion and loss of topsoil to a less than significant level. Therefore, with implementation of GEO-1 and GEO-2 there will be less than significant impacts to soils from the subject subdivision and detention basin. - - 3.6(c). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: There will be no change to the proposed 3 lot annexation portion of the project. The subdivision site and detention basin site are not located in an area that is particularly susceptible to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. The proposed subdivision is not located on slopes or adjacent to an open channel, therefore there is no risk of lateral cracking and spreading. Existing fills and weak, compressible upper soils and loose sandy materials on the subdivision site are not suitable for foundation support in their present condition. Therefore, existing fills will be removed to their full depth and a sufficient amount of the weak uppers soils and loose sandy materials, so as to provide a pad of properly compacted fill beneath foundation elements. Standard CBC requirements, as described above under 3.6(ii), are expected to be sufficient to assure that impacts from landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction and collapse would be less than significant. Lateral cracking and spreading is normally induced in weaker soils on slopes and adjacent to open channels by strong groundshaking during earthquakes. The proposed detention basin is located immediate contiguous to an open channel, Corona Creek, and has the potential to be subject to instability. The Soil Engineering Report for the Detention Basin prepared by Reese & Associates Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, April 9, 2013 indicates that slope inclinations may need to be reduced in order to reduce risks associated with instability. However, the actual need to regrade a portion of the embankment should be determined at the time of grading based on the soil conditions encountered. Impacts associated with the potential instability of the detention basin's slope will be reduced through implementation of mitigation measures Geo -7 below, which requires that the recommendations of the Geotechnical consultants be incorporated into final design. With implementation of mitigation measures, potential impacts associated with instability will be reduced to less than significant levels. 3.6(d). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The primary geotechnical considerations in design and construction of the subdivision are the presence of existing fill materials, weak, compressible, upper natural soils and loose sandy materials, and near -surface clayey materials that have a moderate to high expansion potential. The Soil Investigation for the subdivision made recommendations for site preparation and grading including criteria for moisture conditioning and compaction of fill to accommodate post -tension slab -on -grade floor and foundation systems with perimeter and interior stiffening beams (ribbed foundations) for the proposed residences. Recommendations for paved area improvements included criteria for asphalt concrete pavements underlain by aggregate base materials over a compacted soil subgrade. The subsequent Update Report included site reconnaissance and review of the original investigation report and found the recommendations applicable. The Report concluded that, from a soil -engineering standpoint, the proposed subdivision would be compatible with the geotechnical considerations as described below. The upper natural soils consist of sandy clays and silts and very silty and clayey sands of low to possibly moderate expansion potential. The Report finds that within building footprints and at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter, existing weak upper soils need to be removed (over excavated) to a depth of at least 18 inches below the grade exposed by stripping fill removal and the upper soils containing root growth and organic matter. Page 39 of 79 October 24, 2013 3—�� Because of the presence of near -surface expansive clays and the potential for such soils to be encountered at building pad subgrade level, if post -tensioned floor and foundation systems are used, as proposed, they should be assumed to be underlain by moderately to highly expansive clayey soils. Based on a review of the report and the Design of Post Tensioned Slabs -on -Ground, third edition, the Updated Report specifies additional criteria. Among these are that post -tension slabs should be at least 10 inches thick with an additional 2 -inch thickened edge for stiffening. In addition, where stepped lots are provided with elevation differences of more than about 1 foot, deepened perimeter slab edges may be needed to reduce the risk of significant drying of expansive clayey soils from beneath post- tensioned slab -on -grade floor and foundation systems. To help provide more uniform supporting conditions and reduce potential foundation heave and/or settlement, it will be necessary to verify that expansive soils have not dried and cracked before being covered with fill, and to underlie post- tensioned slab -on -grade areas with a pad of properly compacted fill, as recommended in the Soil Investigation Report. Drilled pier and grade beam foundation systems with raised - wood floors could also be used. The Update finds that future performance of floor slab foundations is critically - -- dependent on proper moisture conditioning of the on-site moderately to highly expansive clays and puts in place moisture conditioning recommendations; GEO-5 and GEO-6 require that these recommendations are incorporated and adhered to. These near surface soils have a high to very high expansion potential, thereby resulting in potentially significant impacts to new foundations and structures. The Report found that pre -swelling and covering these soils with up to 36 inches of compacted and moisture fixed fill material, expansive soils onsite could be remediated. Post -tension slabs, rather than slab -on -grade are proposed in order to mitigate effects of expansive soils. Mitigation Measures GEO-3 through GEO-6, set forth below, would assure that site preparation is conducted in a manner consistent with the requirements necessary to accommodate the expansive potential of soils onsite. With implementation of the mitigation measures GEO-3 through GEO- 6 potential impacts to risk of life and property due to expansive soils will be reduced to less than significant levels. 6(e). No Impact: The proposed project will be connected to the existing sewer system that treats all wastewater effluent generated within the UGB. There are no septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems proposed as part of the subdivision. Therefore, there will be no impact resulting from the adequacy of soils to support septic tanks or other wastewater disposal system. Mitigation Measures: GEO-1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, an erosion control plan along with grading and drainage plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review. These plans shall detail erosion control measures such as site watering, sediment capture, equipment staging and laydown pad, and other erosion control measures to be implemented during construction activity on the project site. GEO-2. All earthwork, grading, trenching, backfilling, and compaction operations shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance (#1046, Title 20, Chapter 20.04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code) and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance #1576, Title 17, Chapter 17.31 of the Petaluma Municipal Code). GEO-3. Expansive soils shall be moisture conditioned for their full depth so as to cause pre -swelling prior to casting of slabs. GEO-4. The design of all earthwork, cuts and fills, drainage, pavements, utilities, foundations, and structural components shall conform with the specifications and criteria contained in the Soils Investigation Report and Update, as approved by the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official. Foundation and structural design for buildings shall meet the Uniform Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e., reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing parapets, etc.). GEO-5. As deemed appropriate by the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official all recommendations as outlined in the preliminary Soils Investigative report prepared for the subject property by Giblin and the Update prepared by Reese, including but not limited to foundations systems, expansive and compressive soils, and moisture conditioning of the on-site moderately to highly expansive clays are herein incorporated by reference and shall be adhered to in order to ensure that appropriate construction measures are incorporated into the design of the project. Page 40 of 79 ,t October 24, 2013 3 AU GEO-6. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the applicant shall obtain a geotechnical engineer to review the final project plans and specifications to determine if they are consistent with the recommendations as outlined in the report and observe grading, compaction, and foundation excavations to verify that conditions are as anticipated and to modify recommendations if warranted. The geotechnical engineer shall sign the improvement plans and certify the design as conforming to the specifications. The geotechnical engineer shall inspect the construction work and shall certify to the City, prior to acceptance of the improvements or issuance of a certificate of occupancy that the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the geotechnical specifications. GEO-7. During grading of the detention basin, the project soil engineer shall review embankment slope conditions encountered and determine whether any localized flattening of the proposed slope inclinations or regrading slope portions to reduce the risk of possible future instability is needed and all recommendations of the soils engineer shall be completed, upon review and approval of the City Engineer. 3.7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of oreenhouse oases? Greenhouse Gas Setting: Greenhouse gas emissions are a cumulative issue in that project -level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions do not directly produce local or regional impacts, but may contribute cumulatively to an impact on global climate change. Individual projects contribute relatively small amounts of GHGs associated with construction activities and operation. GHG emissions are typically a result of the combustion of fossil fuels and/or industrial and agricultural processes. To address GHG's at the State level, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 32 in 2006, which requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Senate Bill 375 has also been adopted, which seeks to curb GHGs by reducing urban sprawl and vehicle miles traveled. The City of Petaluma has also taken steps to address GHG emissions within City limits. The City adopted Resolutions 2002-117 and 2005-118 (both incorporated herein by reference), which calls for the City's participation in the Cities for Climate Project effort and established GHG emission reduction targets of 25% below 1990 level by 2015 for community emissions and 20% below 2000 levels by 2010 for municipal operations, respectively. In addition, the City of Petaluma is currently preparing a Climate Action Plan in partnership with the County and other local jurisdictions. This effort will implement General Plan Policy 4-P- 27. General Plan Policy 2-P-90, which calls for the City to "work with regional and other agencies to create a new rail transit station near Corona Road with high-intensity, transit -oriented development..." is also being pursued. The light rail effort is estimated to take more than 1.4 million car trips off Highway 101 annually and reduce greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming, by at least 124,000 pounds per day. In November 2010, the City adopted an update to the California Building Standards Code, which contains the mandatory California Green Building Code (CalGreen). All new development within the City of Petaluma must comply with CalGreen building standards, which generally achieve energy efficiency approximately 15% Page 41 of 79 October 24, 2013 1-3-41 Less Inan Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Greenhouse gas emissions are a cumulative issue in that project -level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions do not directly produce local or regional impacts, but may contribute cumulatively to an impact on global climate change. Individual projects contribute relatively small amounts of GHGs associated with construction activities and operation. GHG emissions are typically a result of the combustion of fossil fuels and/or industrial and agricultural processes. To address GHG's at the State level, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 32 in 2006, which requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Senate Bill 375 has also been adopted, which seeks to curb GHGs by reducing urban sprawl and vehicle miles traveled. The City of Petaluma has also taken steps to address GHG emissions within City limits. The City adopted Resolutions 2002-117 and 2005-118 (both incorporated herein by reference), which calls for the City's participation in the Cities for Climate Project effort and established GHG emission reduction targets of 25% below 1990 level by 2015 for community emissions and 20% below 2000 levels by 2010 for municipal operations, respectively. In addition, the City of Petaluma is currently preparing a Climate Action Plan in partnership with the County and other local jurisdictions. This effort will implement General Plan Policy 4-P- 27. General Plan Policy 2-P-90, which calls for the City to "work with regional and other agencies to create a new rail transit station near Corona Road with high-intensity, transit -oriented development..." is also being pursued. The light rail effort is estimated to take more than 1.4 million car trips off Highway 101 annually and reduce greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming, by at least 124,000 pounds per day. In November 2010, the City adopted an update to the California Building Standards Code, which contains the mandatory California Green Building Code (CalGreen). All new development within the City of Petaluma must comply with CalGreen building standards, which generally achieve energy efficiency approximately 15% Page 41 of 79 October 24, 2013 1-3-41 beyond Title 24. As such, new development is expected to be more energy efficient, use less resources and emit fewer GHGs. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Discussion: 3.7(a). Less Than Significant: Construction of the proposed subdivision and detention basin will result in GHG emissions from heavy-duty construction equipment, worker trips, and material delivery and hauling. Construction GHG emissions are short-term and will cease once construction is complete. The BAAQMD has not established thresholds of significance for GHG emissions resulting from construction activities. GHG emissions generated from construction of the proposed subdivision and detention basin will not directly or indirectly result in a significant impact to the environment. Therefore, environmental impacts from construction generated GHGs will be less than significant. In 2007, the City prepared a revised Air Quality section for the General Plan EIR to address greenhouse gas emissions. Appendix A of the 2007 Revised EIR includes all of the applicable policies from the General Plan that reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The General Plan is not considered a "qualified" GHG reduction strategy by the BAAQMD. As such, BAAQMD's screening threshold of 1,100 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalents per year (CO2e/yr) is used to evaluate project level significance. In evaluating whether a project would have a potential for reaching or exceeding the thresholds the District established screening criteria based on development type. These criteria_ were derived using default assumptions as well as modeling for indirect emissions (electric generation, solid waste, water use). Projects below the screening size were deemed to not reach or exceed 1,100 metric tons of CO2e.6 For a Single-family development, the BAAQMD screening threshold to determine potentially significant impacts from GHG is 56 dwelling units. As a single-family development that proposes the construction of 30 new units and rehabilitation of the existing 1900's era farmhouse, the proposed Corona Road Subdivision is below the screening level size of 56 dwelling unit and would have a less than significant impact to air quality due to the emission of GHGs. Therefore, the subdivision's generation of GHGs would have less than significant impacts on the environment. Table 3 Operational Related GHG and Precursor Screening Sizes Land Use Type Operational GHG Screening Size Single -Family Residential 56 du Source: Table 3-1, pg 3-2 Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2010 CEQA Guidelines, May 2010. The 3 existing lots proposed for annexation will not result in any construction GHG emissions and are currently operational. Therefore, there will be no change from the existing condition and this aspect of the proposed project will have no impact on GHGs. Construction of the proposed detention basin will result in the temporary emissions of greenhouse gases. Onsite grading, grubbing, and earthwork, as well as soil hauling will result in the emission of 136.10 tons of CO2 (124.47 metric tons). This is well below the threshold of 1,110 metric tons of CO2e. Therefore impacts due to the emission of GHG from construction of the detention basin will be less than significant. 3.7(b). Less Than Significant: As shown in the table below, the project including the proposed subdivision, 3 existing lot annexation, and the detention basin would not result in a conflict with plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, project impacts due to the emission of greenhouse gases would be less than significant. a "Bay Area Air Quality Management District: CEQA Guidelines", Table 2-1, prepared May 2010. Page 42 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-42- Table 4 GHG Policies Measures and Policies Relation of the Project to MeasureslPolicies State Reduction Measures Measures Applicable to Energy Use in Buildings SB 1368 (Regulation of This measure would increase renewable energy in the California greenhouse gases from load grid from 11 % to 20% by 2010. Therefore the electricity used by the serving entities) project would result in project operational emissions being reduced by 9%. CONSISTENT IOU Energy Efficiency Programs This measure would outline a program for using energy more (California Public Utilities efficiently by both residences and businesses. This measure has Commission) less of a direct impact and relies on the owner to install and/or the residents to properly use energy efficient products. Adherence to CalGreen standards as required will assure that the project is CONSISTENT. Urban Forestry This measure is not only about increasing the number of trees in a 4-P-6: Improve air quality through community but also selecting the species and placement of tree so required planting of trees that they contribute to a reduction in heating and cooling needs. along streets and within The landscape plan for the project includes a number of street parks. trees. The landscaping plan has been reviewed by staff and implements the General Plan policy. CONSISTENT. California Solar Initiative— 2,000 This measure seeks to deliver 2,000 megawatts of clean, emission - MW by 2016 free energy to the grid through installation of passive solar systems. 4-P-19 (A): Residential project of 5 or The new residential structures shall be required to be "pre -plumbed" more units shall wire all units for both passive solar and solar hot water to allow installation of for future photovoltaic arrays. such facilities. CONSISTENT Additional RPS (33% by 2020) This measure would increase renewable energy in the California (Article 16 of Chapter 2.3 of Part I grid from the 20% goal identified above under SB 1368 to 33% by of Public Utilities Code) 2020. Therefore the electricity used by the project would result in an additional 13% emission reduction over the life of the project. CONSISTENT Measures Applicable to Vehicle Emissions Vehicle Climate Change Standards Neither the City nor the developer can influence the car or fuel purchasing habits of those living in or visiting the project site. However, over the life of the project, as these state measures come Low Carbon Fuel Standard Strengthen Light Duty Vehicle Technology online, and cars and fuel become more efficient, and those visiting the site replace their aging cars, it is a reasonable assumption that Heavy-duty Vehicle Emission Reductions emissions from the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be cleaner. In addition in the future, the public transit system, including railway will be improved, thereby providing alternatives types of transportation. CONSISTENT 5-P-22 Preserve and enhance Improvements for the project shall include bicycle/pedestrian pedestrian connectivity in existing connections, as required. The project will pay the Traffic neighborhoods and require a well Development Impact Fee which funds pedestrian and bicycle connected pedestrian network linking improvements through the City. In addition, the project provides for new and existing developments to pedestrian sidewalks on both sides of Public Streets A and B that adjacent land uses. interconnect with the existing pedestrian network in the project 5-P-25 Establish a network of multi- vicinity. CONSISTENT use trails to facilitate safe and direct off-street bicycle and pedestrian travel. Page 43 of 79 October 24, 2013 (3—As Measures and Policies Relation of the Project to Measures/Policies 2-P-94 Encourage the development Water conservation standards such as limiting lawn size have been of landscape standards that reduce adopted by the City, and the project shall demonstrate compliance existing lawns and require tree with the Water Conservation Ordinance, Petaluma Municipal Code planting. Chapter 15.17, prior to building permit issuance. The landscape plan has been preliminarily reviewed with the City's Water Conservation Regulations Ordinance and determined to be in compliance with the ordinance. CONSISTENT 2-P-121 Evaluate the success of the Current minimum standard for Build It Green is 50 points. The voluntary green program and develop project shall be required to meet a minimum of at least a 50 -point and implement a mandatory program rating. At a minimum meeting Build It Green standards results in for new residential, commercial and 15% higher energy efficiency over current State standards. The municipal development and project shall comply with all applicable Build It Green Standards. remodels. The City of Petaluma adopted the CalGreen Tier One green building requirements. The purpose is to improve public health, safety and general welfare through enhancement of design and construction of buildings by encouraging sustainable construction practices. CalGreen applies to planning, design, operation, construction, use and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure on a statewide basis, unless otherwise indicated. This includes low- rise (three -stories or less) residential structures. The applicant shall be required to conform to the CalGreen Tier One requirements. http://www.hcd.ca.gov/codes/slil/CALGreenGuide COMPLETE.pdf CONSISTENT Page 44 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-1-4 3.8. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ Less Than environment through reasonably foreseeable upset for people residing or working in the project area? Potentially Significant Lessthan No Would thero ect: Significant with Significant Impact P 1 Impact Mitigation Impact ❑ ® ❑ ❑ proposed school? Incorporated d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to environment through the routine transport, use, or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ disposal of hazardous materials? public or the environment? ❑ ® e) For a project located within an airport land use b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset for people residing or working in the project area? and accident conditions involving the release of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ hazardous materials into the environment? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or El El waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ proposed school? d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a El El ® Elresult, would create a significant hazard to the including where wildlands are adjacent to public or the environment? ❑ ® e) For a project located within an airport land use urbanized areas or where residences are plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport of public use El El 1:1airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 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 project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or El El Elemergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR. Phase I ESA prepared by Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences, LLC, Hazardous Material Setting: Regulations related to hazardous materials and waste are implemented by a number of governmental agencies that have established regulations regarding the proper transportation, handling, management, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials for specific operations and activities. Pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a hazardous waste and substances sites list (Cortese List). Page 45 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 -15 There are no Cortese sites within the City of Petaluma, including the project site. Hazardous waste management in Petaluma is administered by the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency through the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. Hazards/Hazardous Materials Impact Discussion: 3.8(a -c). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed project consists of an annexation/prezoning, construction of a detention basin and subdivision for a residential development. None of the proposed land uses will use, generate, or emit hazardous materials. Nor will the project result in the storage of chemical or hazardous materials onsite. The detention basin is adjacent to the ballfield of the Corona Elementary School and the subdivision is within one-quarter mile of the school. During construction activities, the use of heavy equipment may require various types of fuel that could be considered potentially hazardous. All applicable state and federal regulation related to the transport, use, handling, storage, and/or disposal of potentially hazardous substances will be adhered to during construction. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, as further described below, under Section 3.9 (a), a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the handling of hazardous materials shall be implemented during all construction activities. In the event that any construction activities involve the storage of chemicals or hazardous materials on-site, the applicant is required to file a declaration form with the Fire Marshal's office and obtain a hazardous materials storage permit, pursuant to the city fire code ordinance. These are standard requirements for control of hazardous materials. Mitigation measure HYDRO -1 below, will ensure that potentially hazardous substances used during construction (fuels, oils, and solvents) are properly stored and maintained. Therefore, with implementation of mitigation measure HYDRO -1 the potential impacts related to hazardous materials will be reduced to levels below significance. 3.8(d). Less Than Significant: An assessment of potential contaminants (Environmental Site Assessment, Phase I Investigation, Harris & Lee, June 4, 2009) was prepared for the subdivision property. The Investigation did not identify any recognized environmental conditions onsite. An earlier 2005 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment mentioned an aboveground waste oil tank and some nearby oil stained soil. It also mentioned areas of the proposed subdivision property where automobiles were being serviced and where the housekeeping was generally inadequate. The 2009 update found no indication of these former reports and no clear way to identify their location onsite. It is likely that in the course of demolition and removal of these structures, grading and surface soil redistribution occurred, which would make the identification of any shallow soil contamination difficult or impossible to locate. Such grading would have diluted any residual oil into the soil and hastened the natural degradation of any oil that may have been present in shallow soils. Accordingly, the possibility of small amounts of oil formerly present in the shallow soils is not considered of likely significance. Prior to 1960 the subdivision site was a chicken ranch and in the 1970's a hog farm was operational. Post 1979 there were no significant agricultural activities onsite and the property was maintained as a rural residential dwelling unit. During site reconnaissance in 2009 no indications of recognized environmental conditions were observed, including those associated with the past agricultural activities onsite. The proposed subdivision site does not appear on any standard record sources or on any other environmental database searched and reported upon by the Environmental Data Resources. In addition there were no records for the use of pesticides onsite, which is regulated by the Sonoma County Agricultural Commissioner's office. Based on the Phase Investigation there is no evidence of recognized environmental conditions, including potentially hazardous materials associated with any of the past usage onsite. Therefore, the potential for the proposed subdivision to be impacted due to hazardous materials onsite is expected to be less than significant. The proposed detention basin site was not subject to a Phase I ESA. However, a record search performed using EnviroStor' did not identify any known contaminants onsite. The detention basin property has been vacant and unused for the past several decades and no hazardous materials are expected to be present onsite. Therefore, development of the proposed detention basin site is expected to have a less than significant impact due to the presence of hazardous material - 7 Accessed on August 26, 2013: http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/ Page 46 of 79 ^ / October 24, 2013 (S-44 _44 3.8(e -f). No Impact: There is not a private airstrip within the project vicinity. The Project is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan. The nearest airport is the Petaluma Municipal Airport, which is located approximately 2 miles east of the subdivision site. The subject project, including annexation of the 3 existing lots, the subdivision, and detention basin, would not result in a safety hazard due to proximity to the airport. Nor would the project create a safety concern for people working or residing onsite. The proposed Project would have no impact related to hazards associated with the Petaluma Airport. 3.8(g). No Impact: Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation will not alter any emergency response or evacuation routes. Site plans include ingress and egress access that accommodate emergency vehicles and provide connectivity to the existing circulation and street system. The proposed Project will have no impact on the emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. 3.8(h). Less Than Significant: The project site is located on the edge of an urbanized environment and adjacent to low-density residential development to the east and south. There are no wildlands in the project vicinity. There is minimal risk from wildland fires due to proximity to wildland. The project would have less than significant impacts related to the exposure of people/structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Mitigation Measures: None required. Page 47 of 2 October 24,2013 1 3 - 4 7 3.9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant with Significant Impact P J Impact Mitigation Impact a) Violate- any -water quality standards- or waste El ® 11-- El requirements? of surface runoff in a manner, which would result b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or in flooding on- or off-site? interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such e) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the El El ® El rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop systems or provide substantial additional sources of ❑ ❑ to a level which would not support existing land uses or ❑ polluted runoff? planned uses for which permits have been granted)? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? - - c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the ❑ ® ❑ site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result El El M El in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ❑ Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or substantially increase the rate or El El ® El of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures ❑ ® ❑ ❑ that would impede or redirect flood flows? 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 levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR; XP -Storm Evaluation dated March 5, 2013 prepared by WEST Consultants, Inc.; and a Stormwater Control Plan dated March 2011 prepared by Steven J. Lafranchi and Associates, Inc. Page 48 of 79 11 p b October 24, 2013 (� _ h Hvdrologv and Water Quality Setting: The Petaluma River is the primary watercourse within the City of Petaluma and the Petaluma watershed (an area of approximately 46 square miles). The Petaluma River is tidally influenced and flows in a southeast direction into San Pablo Bay. The Petaluma River is used for recreational boating and water sports as well as long-standing river -dependent industrial operations. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) dredges the river on a four-year cycle to maintain navigability for commercial shipping. In order to ensure continued dredging services from the USACE, there must be an "economically justifiable" tonnage of commercial products moved on the river, as determined by the USACE. The annexation area and the detention basin are not in the immediate proximity to the Petaluma River. However, the proposed detention basin is adjacent to Corona Creek, which is a small tributary stream that drains to the Petaluma River. Corona Creek runs from the northeast to southwest immediately east of the detention basin site and approximately 500 feet from the nearest point of the proposed subdivision. The creek bisects suburban residential development south of Riesling Road and contains an adjacent Class -I trail that provides recreational opportunities and public benefit. Section 402 of the Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of pollutants to waters of the US. The National - Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit Requirements apply to grading, grubbing, and other ground disturbance activities. Construction activities on more than one acre are subject to NPDES permitting requirements including, the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Low Impact Development (LID) requirements establish limitations on the storm water runoff emanating from development sites. New development, including the Corona Road Subdivision, is required to mimic pre - developed conditions, protect water quality, and retain runoff from impervious surfaces onsite. A detention basin is proposed to be developed on city -owned land in the Urban Separator, abutting Corona Creek, just northeast of Riesling Road. The proposed detention basin would occupy approximately t4.6 acres. The top of the detention basin will be close to the Riesling Road elevation, at 52.1 NAVD, with the bottom of the basin at elevation 45.1 NAVD with side slopes of two horizontal units to one vertical unit (2:1). The detention basin connection to Corona Creek is designed as a 20 -foot wide sharp crested weir with an adjustable crest and a crest elevation of 47.3 NAVD. An 18 -inch culvert is included to drain the detention basin, with a flap gate to prevent flow from Corona Creek from filing the detention basin during the rising limb of the hydrograph. The basin storage volume is 10.38 acre feet (452,115 cubic feet). In a 10 -year event flood, the basin is projected to have a maximum water depth of 2.21 feet (with 4.79 feet of freeboard). In a 100 -year event flood, the basin is projected to have a maximum water depth of 4.61 feet (with 2.39 feet of freeboard). Construction of the proposed detention basin avoids the need for upsizing of storm drain system on the subdivision site. Private area run off will be treated on each lot and public run off will be treated by a CDS Water Quality System, as further described below. These techniques provide enhanced water quality protection by filtering out potential pollutants. Hydrology and Water Quality Impact Discussion: 3.9(a). Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation: A Storm Water Control Plan has been prepared for the subject subdivision that sets forth Best Management Practices (BMP) and finds that suspended solids and hydrocarbons in stormwater runoff generated onsite can be removed. The Plan proposes the use of CDS Technologies or Vortechs that reduce pollutants in storm water to levels that are consistent with local and state water quality requirements. In addition, the project is required to prepare a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to construction, see mitigation measure HYDRO -1 below. The SWMP sets forth source controls to preserve water quality standards, and adhere to waste discharge requirements. These source controls are designed to keep pollutants out of stormwater and include minimizing impervious surfaces, signage at catch basins that the system drains to a creek, low water demanding landscaping palette, smart control irrigation that maximized water to root zone and avoids overwatering or excessive watering, and reducing sediment runoff by replanting with sufficient ground cover. Page 49 of 79 October 24, 2013 ` Like the SWMP, the intent of the SWPPP is to prevent offsite runoff of pollutants and includes measures such as hydro mulching, use of fiber rolls at storm drain inlets, anti -tracking pads, spill prevention, designated wash out areas, and others. With implementation of these water quality control and waste discharge requirements, the subject project will have less than significant impacts to hydrology and water quality. 3.9(b). Less Than Significant Impact: The City has adequate water supply resources to accommodate development of the subdivision without depleting, degrading or altering groundwater supplies or interfering substantially with groundwater recharge. The subject project would not result in the lowering of the aquifer or the local groundwater table. The project's water demands are consistent with water demands evaluated in the 2010 UWMP, which found sufficient water supplies are available to meet existing and planned future development within the UGB. Groundwater reserves will not be impacted by the proposed development. New development proposed as part of the subdivision will not use groundwater. The three existing residences within the annexation area currently use groundwater, which is extracted from a well on the proposed subdivision site. The project proposes to relocate the existing well to accommodate continued use by the three existing homes along Corona Road; no change in the use of groundwater is proposed. As such, the project would have a less than significant impact to groundwater supplies and capacity. 3.9(c -f). Less Than Significant Impact: The project would not alter the course of a stream or river or result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site. The proposed detention basin size, weir elevations, and weir width represent the maximized detention configuration. The proposed Corona Subdivision with the Riesling Road detention basin reduces water surface elevations below existing elevations not only for the project site and homes in the vicinity but also for Corona Creek and the Petaluma River; if the detention basin was not proposed as a part of the project, the 100 -year water surface elevation due to the Corona Subdivision would increase slightly and may pose a potential flood impact in the vicinity of the project and downstream (A maximum of 0.41 feet in the vicinity of the project and 0.01 feet downstream on the Petaluma River). As proposed, the detention basin reduces the 100 -year flooding event in the vicinity of the Corona Subdivision by an average of about 0.70 feet, because the upstream detention results in less water breaking out from Corona Creek near the western bend of Stonehenge Way. The 100 -year water surface elevation in Corona Creek would be reduced by an average of about 0.60 feet, and in the Petaluma River by an average of about 0.02 feet. Thus, the detention basin would protect the subdivision site and vicinity from flooding during the 100 - year flood event. Site grading for the subdivision shall direct storm water to private and public storm drains. Private area run off will be treated on each lot. Public run off will be treated by a CDS Water Quality System (see detail Sheet TM -11) or approved equal. All post development detention will be mitigated by the construction of the off-site detention pond. Onsite drainage consisting of appropriately sized pipes is proposed to provide of stormwater protection during storm events, and retain the general direction and pattern of drainage onsite to match pre - development conditions. The proposed storm drain facilities would effectively capture within the storm drain system and evacuate the 10 -year event from the site, pursuant to the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) standard. The lowest pad elevation proposed for the subdivision site would be above the maximum water surface elevation projected for the 100 -year flood. Thus, any breakout flows of the 100 -year flood would be contained between the curbs of the streets, in accordance with the SCWA standard. The proposed onsite storm drain system would not contribute runoff water that exceeds the capacity of the existing storm drain system. The project will adhere to all requirements for water quality controls and impacts to water quality will be less than significant. 3.9(g -i). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: Based on FEMA Community Panel 06097C 0894E, effective December 2008, the subdivision site is located outside of the 100 -year flood plain. However, the City of Petaluma has developed a new 100 -year storm water model to be adopted as the new Flood Insurance Rate Map (Communitywide LOMR). FEMA has accepted the City's model and technical data and in April 2012 released draft FIRM panels; formal adoption is anticipated in the Fall of 2013. Draft FIRM panel 894 of 1150 shows most of the subject subdivision within Zone AE (the 100 -year floodplain), with base flood elevations determined. The map shows that the flood waters break out of Corona Creek along the western end of Stonehenge Way. Elevating the proposed Subdivision to remove it from the 100 -year floodplain would increase the water surface elevation in the vicinity of the project by a maximum of 0.41 feet. To mitigate the lost floodplain storage due to project development, a detention basin upstream in the city -owned Urban Page 50 of 79 October 24, 2013 Separator is proposed as part of the project. The detention basin is sized and designed to maximize detention and thus benefits the greater community by also removing adjacent existing houses to the east and south from the 100 -year flood plain. With the proposed project, any breakout flow from Corona Creek would be contained in the street, consistent with Sonoma County flood control policy, and would not need to be shown on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. With development of the proposed detention basin, the 100 -year water surface elevation would be reduced in Corona Creek by an average of about 0.6 feet, and in the Petaluma River by an average of about 0.02 feet. That is, the proposed detention basin will provide excess water storage capacity during the 100 -year storm event, which will reduce the downstream water surface elevation and overflow potential of Corona Creek. Although the proposed detention basin will reduce the risk of flooding, improvements on the subdivision site for stormwater retention and ongoing maintenance will ensure that flood risks are reduced to levels below significance. Implementation of HYDRO -2 and HYDRO -3 below will reduce risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, to less than significant levels. Therefore, with development of the detention basin as proposed, the subject project would have less than significant impact due to risk of flooding to people and housing. _ The proposed detention basin will remove housing from the flood hazard associated with the 10 year and 100 year flood. In order to ensure its long term function and operation, ongoing maintenance of the detention basin pursuant to measure HYDRO -4 below is required. Implementation of HYDRO -4 will reduce potential impacts associated with the detention basin to levels below significance. 90). No Impact: The project area is not subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow. There are no substantial water bodies in the immediate vicinity of the project site. There will be no impact from inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow resulting from project implementation. Mitigation Measures: HYDRO -1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project shall prepare a SWMP pursuant to the requirements set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), which shall be implemented throughout project construction and operation. The Applicant shall complete and submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and appropriate filing fee to the SWRCB. The applicant shall file a Notice of Termination (NOT) with the SWRCB upon project completion. The SWPPP shall be submitted for review and approval by Public Works prior to approval of grading permits. City inspectors shall inspect the improvements and verify compliance prior to acceptance of improvements. The SWPPP shall comply with San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. At a minimum, the plan shall: (a) identify specific types and sources of storm water pollutants; (b) determine the location and nature of potential impacts; and (c) specify and incorporate appropriate control measures into the project design and improvement plans. HYDRO -2. In accordance with City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 Policy 8-P-36, the project shall include an off-site storm water detention system to limit post -construction storm water peak flows leaving the site to not exceed pre -development peak flows by detaining peak storm water runoff from the 100 -year, 24 hour storm event. Final storm water calculations shall be designed in accordance with City of Petaluma and Sonoma County Water Agency requirements and shall be provided with the project construction drawings, subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer. HYDRO -3. The subdivision conditions, covenants and restrictions shall establish and fund a mechanism to ensure long term maintenance, inspection and repair as needed for the onsite storm water system and post construction storm water treatment measures and best management practices. The systems shall be inspected at least annually, prior to the onset of the rainy season, by a Civil Engineer licensed to practice in the State of California, to ensure the drainage systems are performing as designed and required in project approvals. The Civil Engineer shall prepare a signed and sealed report of the inspection including findings regarding the condition of the storm water and treatment systems, photo documentation, any necessary proposed modifications and Page 51 of 79 October 24, 2013 a statement indicating that the system is operating as designed and required by project approvals. The annual report shall be submitted to the City of Petaluma Planning Department and Department of Public Works and Utilities no later than October 151h of each year. HYDRO -4. Prior to public improvement plan approval, a mechanism (such as a Landscaping Assessment District) shall be in place to ensure funding of on-going maintenance, inspection, and as needed repair of the detention basin. The detention basin shall be inspected at least annually, prior to the onset of the rainy season, by a Civil Engineer licensed to practice in the State of California, to ensure that the weir is performing as designed and required in project approvals. The Civil Engineer shall prepare a signed and sealed report of the inspection including findings regarding the condition of the detention basin, photo documentation, any necessary proposed modifications and a statement indicating that the system is operating as designed and required by project approvals. The annual report shall be submitted to the City of Petaluma Planning - Department and Department of Public Works and Utilities no later than October 151b of each year. 3.10. - LAND USE AND PLANNING b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, El ® El El plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or natural community conservation plan? Sources: 2025 General Plan Land Use and EIR, Figure 3.1-2 Planning Subareas; and Corona Ely Specific Land Use and Planning Setting: The City's land uses within the Urban Growth Boundary include residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, open space and public lands. Approximately 44% of the UGB lands are designated for residential development. The subject subdivision is currently located within the UGB, but outside of City limits. The project also proposes annexation of the subdivision parcel along with 3 existing lots that are currently developed with single-family homes, in order to provide a uniform boundary line at the city limit. The proposed detention basin, located north of the proposed annexation area, is currently within City limits and is at the edge of the UGB, with a land use designation of urban separator. Petaluma's General Plan 2025 Policies contained in the Petaluma General Plan that have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and those that apply to this project include the following: Page 52 of 79 October 24, 2013 J-3— 52 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Would the W with Impact project: P 1 Mitigation Incorporated ❑ ❑ ® ❑ a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, El ® El El plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or natural community conservation plan? Sources: 2025 General Plan Land Use and EIR, Figure 3.1-2 Planning Subareas; and Corona Ely Specific Land Use and Planning Setting: The City's land uses within the Urban Growth Boundary include residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, open space and public lands. Approximately 44% of the UGB lands are designated for residential development. The subject subdivision is currently located within the UGB, but outside of City limits. The project also proposes annexation of the subdivision parcel along with 3 existing lots that are currently developed with single-family homes, in order to provide a uniform boundary line at the city limit. The proposed detention basin, located north of the proposed annexation area, is currently within City limits and is at the edge of the UGB, with a land use designation of urban separator. Petaluma's General Plan 2025 Policies contained in the Petaluma General Plan that have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and those that apply to this project include the following: Page 52 of 79 October 24, 2013 J-3— 52 1-P-1: Promote a range of land uses at densities and intensities to serve the community needs within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). 1-P-36: For properties adjoining the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), it is the intent of the City that project developed in the City or requesting City services shall be of limited density (as shown on the General Plan Land Use Map), unless greater density is required to satisfy the requirements of state housing laws, and shall be designed to preserve the visual and physical openness and preserve the aesthetic and natural features of that portion of the property proximate to the rural areas outside of the designated Urban Growth Boundary. 1-P-38: Require all development outside of City limits and within the UGB to annex to the city as a condition of extension of City services. Annexation requires the extension of both potable water and sewer services in compliance with adopted Master Plan, in conjunction with other public improvements as deemed appropriate by the City. 2-P-104: Keep Corona Road as a rural two-lane road (east of Sonoma Mountain Parkway) with an improved cross-section to facilitate safer bicycle and pedestrian use utilizing innovate design standards that increase connectivity and safety while maintaining the rural context. 5-P-19: All new and redesigned streets shall be bicycle and pedestrian friendly in design. 11-P-4.4: Continue to require residential projects of five or more units to contribute to the provision of below- market rate housing in one of the following ways: • Within a half -mile radius of the planned SMART stations, the developer shall provide at least 15% of the units in a for -sale project at prices affordable to low- and moderate -income households for a minimum period of 30 years. • When the project is non -transit oriented, the developer can make an in -lieu payment to the City's Housing Fund. • Use alternative methods to meet the intent of the inclusionary requirement, subject to approval by the City Council. 11 -P -20B: Continue to require the planting of street and parking lot trees as part of residential projects to provide cooling during the summer months. Corona Ely Specific Plan The subject property is located within the Corona Ely Specific Plan (CESP). The CESP was adopted in 1989 to provide the development regulations for 675 acres of principally agricultural lands to the northeast of town. Most all of the CESP land has been developed; the Corona Road Subdivision land represents one of the few remaining undeveloped parcels from that planning effort. The Corona Road corridor is locally valued for its picturesque, country qualities, and is designated a Scenic Country Corridor in the CESP (Figure 4-2). The narrow road is lined with distinctive, overhanging rows of California live oaks and other specimen trees. Behind the trees are scattered country homes and farmsteads. The principal goal for Corona Road is to preserve the valued rural character of this important link between country and town. Preservation of the existing trees and the country homes and farmsteads will retain the overall rural feeling and character of Corona Road. The following policies are set forth in the CESP to guide development while retaining the rural character: Policy 30: The "country road" feeling of the route shall be preserved by maintaining the current two-lane rural design standard of the roadway (no curb and gutter, and no street lights except at intersections with designated arterials) and by retaining existing open drainage ditches along the roadside. Policy 31: The existing tree canopy of specimen California live oaks and other mature roadside trees on other side of the route shall be protected against future removal of disturbance. Page 53 of 79 October 24, 2013 i -rj Policy 32: Aged or diseased trees shall be replaced as necessary and in kind to preserve and enhance the character of the route over the long term. Policy 33: To the degree feasible, typical rural features along Corona Road shall be retained, and future development along the route should repeat those features. For example, future fence construction along the route shall be confined to open designs. Policy 34: Paved driveways are not required in the city and shall also be discouraged along Corona Road. Policy 92: Local streets shall emphasize curvilinear alignments, short loop streets, and cul-de-sacs to create neighborhood unity and visual interest, reduce traffic speeds, and discourage through traffic. Policy 95: All Corona/Ely residential streets shall have 4 to 5 -foot planting strips within the right-of-way on both sides of the street between the curb and sidewalk, rather than having the sidewalk adjacent to the street. Policy 96; The Street Landscape Plan shall specify planting, irrigation, pedestrian & street signage, street lighting, underground utility, and mailbox details. There should be an approved Street Landscape Plan for each subdivision. Policy 124: The separator edge landscaping should achieve an average overall width between curb and fence of 25 feet. The 25 foot width should vary in order to create a more interesting and natural appearing transition. The landscaping with the transitional strip should include low -growing, low - maintenance shrubs to enhance the edge and control access without obstructing views. Policy 125: Fencing shall be designed to prevent vehicular access to the separator. The fencing shall be less than 3 -feet high and shall feature an open or "transparent" design. Policy 141: Public improvement and private development plans for the Corona/Ely area shall be designed to avoid removal of or harm of significant vegetation features mapped on Figure 4-2. This figure maps distinctive country homes and farmsteads and mature trees along the Corona Road frontage of the subject site. Petaluma's Implementing Zoning Ordinance As Table 2-1 and Chapter 4 of the IZO states, the zoning district that is consistent with and implements the Very Low Density Residential land use classification of the General Plan is R1, and the zoning district that is consistent with and implements the Low Density Residential land use classification is R2. Land Use and Planning Impact Discussion: 3.10(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The project proposes a subdivision on a currently vacant lot adjacent to an established neighborhood, its annexation into city limits (with related prezoning), as well as the development of an offsite detention basin. As proposed, the project will not divide an established community; rather it will provide connectivity in scope and scale between the very low residential development along Corona Road with the low density residential development along Corona Creek. It is consistent with the General Plan and the Corona Ely Specific Plan. The proposed subdivision site is currently under -developed, with only one house on the 10.1 acre parcel. Although the parcel has frontage along the rural Corona Road, access to all new homes will be provided through Andover Way via Maria Drive, within the existing neighborhood. No new driveways from Corona Road are proposed as part of the subject project. The existing driveways off of Corona Road will remain to provide access to those residences, including the future residence that will replace the demolished house at 470 Corona Road. The proposed access to the subdivision will be provided through the existing neighborhood, and serve as a natural extension of the current residential streets. The proposed subdivision will provide a land use consistent with the surrounding development. Annexation as proposed will provide for a uniform City boundary line consistent with the UGB. The detention basin is located within the Urban Separator and will be improved to provide pedestrian trails and connectivity to the existing Page 54 of 79 October 24, 2013 i 3 -54- Corona Creek path. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impacts in regards to dividing an established community. 3.10(b). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed project is required to comply with all General Plan policies and the implementing zoning ordinance. As described herein the project identifies potential impacts related to biological resources, exposure to geotechnical hazards, and temporary impacts from construction noise and air quality, all of which can be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. With implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would not conflict with the City of Petaluma's General Plan 2025, the Corona Ely Specific Plan (CESP), or any other applicable regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a potential environmental effect. Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth herein, the project would be consistent with applicable policies and regulations. The General Plan designates the 5.6 gross acres nearest Corona Road as Very Low Density Residential (VLDR = 0.6 to 2.5 housing units to the net acre) and the 4.5 gross acres beyond as Low Density Residential (LDR = 2.6 to 8.0 housing units to the net acre). As such, the General Plan designation allows for no more than eleven homes within the VLDR land use and no more than 25 homes within the LDR land use. The subdivision proposes 9 homes within the VLDR area and 22 homes within the LDR area, for a total of 31 homes within the subdivision (one of which is an existing 1900 era farmhome). Thus, the project's proposed density and the location of that density are consistent with the City's General Plan. The VLDR designation has a density range of 0.6 to 2.5 units per acre, with lot sizes ranging from approximately 20,093 square feet up to 34,914 square feet. Given that the R1 zone has a minimum lot size of 20,000 square this would be the most appropriate zoning for the VLDR land use. The LDR designation has a density range of 2.6 to 8.0 units per acre, and proposes lot sizes ranging from 6,000 square feet up to 8,954 square feet. Given that the R2 zone has a minimum lot size of 6,000 square this would be the most appropriate zoning for the LDR land use. Based on these categories, the proposed pre -zone is consistent the IZO and the General Plan land use designations. The zoning district, which is consistent with and implements the Very Low Density Residential land use classification of the General Plan is R1 and the zoning district which is consistent with and implements the Low Density Residential land use classification is R2. The project proposes the Pre -Zoning for R1 and R2 and therefore is consistent with the IZO. The subdivision and pre -zoning are consistent with the General Plan land use designation and IZO as it is a residential project of conforming density. General Plan policy 1-P-36 requires that low density land use designations be applied for properties adjacent to the UGB. At densities proposed, the project provides for LDR and VLDR consistent with the General Plan land use map and zoning. The parcels within 200 feet of the Urban Growth Boundary (Corona Road) are each about a half -acre. As an annexation project, development is required to extend all utilities to the project site. Service lines are currently stubbed out for tie in to the citywide system adjacent to the subdivision site at the current stub of Monica Way. The tentative subdivision map shows the extension of utilities from the stub out at Monica Way, within the proposed public streets. As such, the proposed annexation is consistent with policy 1-P-38 since the project area is well served by utilities. Regarding Housing 11-P-4.4, the City's Housing Director has requested that the City Council allow the payment of in -lieu fees rather than on-site construction; project conditions will require whichever means of affordable housing provision the Council requires. The project retains Corona Road as a rural, two-lane roadway and proposes to maintain connectivity by providing pedestrian and bicycle access via internal networks that interconnect with trails in the project vicinity. The intent of policy 2-P-104 is to preserve the rural character of Corona Road while providing for enhanced pedestrian and bicycle access. Widening of Corona Road to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle facilities would interfere with the intent to preserve its rural character. Historic and aesthetic resources are preserved through the required restoration of the 1900 era farmhouse on the annexation site, large lots along Corona Road, and preservation of Right of Way Trees along Corona Road. In addition, the project retains the rural character of Corona Road by maintaining two lanes and not adding new driveways. The Corona River trail provides pedestrian and bicycle access to the regional trail Page 55 of 79 (3 55 October 24, 2013 network. The rural character of the site is retained since the project does not propose widening Corona Road, nor does it introduce any additional driveways or vehicular access to the site via Corona Road. The project includes the provision for proposed public streets to be improved with sidewalks for pedestrians and sufficient right of way to accommodate bicycles, consistent with policy 5-P-19. In addition, the project proposes right of way street trees to enhance the canopy and shading pursuant to 11 -P-20B. Street trees and planter strip landscaping are proposed on subdivision public streets A and B and will be further detailed prior to Improvement Plan approval (see LU -1). Compliance with the construction emission reduction measures specified by items 4-P-1 5D and 4-P-16 will be achieved pursuant to Mitigation Measure AQ -1 above. As described under Section 3.9, potential floodplain impacts are reduced to less than significant levels via the detention basin that is proposed as part of the subject project. Section 6.070D of the City's Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) which states "All new residential construction in the floodplain shall be elevated so that the lowest habitable floor is at least 12 inches above the base flood elevation," is not applicable because, with the detention basin component of the project, all residential lots will be removed from the floodplain. The detention basin shall be designed and constructed by the developer and maintained by the Corona Road Landscaping Assessment District (LAD), as required by Mitigation Measure LU -2 and HYDRO -4. The proposed detention basin is located on urban separator lands, as identified in the City's General Plan Land Use Map. The proposed use would be consistent with the Goal 1-G-3 (Maintain a well-defined boundary at the edge of urban development.) by establishing a use that would permanently retain open space. As part of the Detention Basin development, the project proposes to improve the urban separator by constructing for the first time the urban separator edge treatment described by the CESP Policies 124 and 125. The Urban Separator Pathway shall be constructed parallel to Riesling Road and will provide interconnectivity to the existing Corona Creek Trail to the east and the existing Corona Creek Elementary School to the West. The detention basin will be setback an average of 25 feet from Riesling Road and the 25 foot deep edge treatment area will be improved with an 8 foot wide multi -use path, low shrubs to retain the open space views, and a 3 foot high open fence. Thus, this section of Urban Separator shall gain an edge treatment consistent with that typical of the east side. Summary of Land Use Impacts As mitigated, the project does not conflict with the City of Petaluma's General Plan 2025, Corona Ely Specific Plan (CESP), Implement Zoning Ordinance, or any other applicable regulation. With implementation of mitigation measures, LU -1 through LU -2, as well as those measures listed throughout this document, the project's potentially significant impacts due to conflicts with applicable land use, policy, or zoning, would be reduced to levels below significance. 3.10(c). No Impact: The project is not subject to a habitat conservation plan or a natural community conservation plan. There are no conservation plans that apply to the UGB. As described in Section 3.5 above, required measure will ensure that biological resources are protected. Therefore, the project will have no impact to any conservation plan or natural community plan. Mitigation Measures: LU -1. Prior to final map/improvement plan approval, to ensure consistency with the CESP, the plans shall show the proposed lighting design, landscaping design, and mailbox design for all development within the subdivision, subject to staff review and approval. LU -2. A funding mechanism such as a Landscaping Assessment District shall be established to levee funds for the ongoing maintenance of the detention basin to be conducted by the City. Page 56 of October / 24, 2013 13-54 3.11. MINERAL RESOURCES Mineral Resources Imoact Discussion 3.11(a -b). No Impact: There are no mineral resources within the UGB. Soil studies conducted as part of the as part of the Geotechnical Investigation and Phase I Report did not reveal any valuable mineral resources onsite. The project site has not been delineated as a locally -important mineral resource recovery site on any plans. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known resource, including locally important mineral resources. Therefore, the project will have no impact to mineral resources. Mitigation Measures: None required Page 57 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-57 Potentially Significant Less than No Would thero ect: Significant with Significant Impact P 1 Impact Mitigation Impact ... Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the El El Elregion and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ other land use plan? Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR. Mineral Resources Imoact Discussion 3.11(a -b). No Impact: There are no mineral resources within the UGB. Soil studies conducted as part of the as part of the Geotechnical Investigation and Phase I Report did not reveal any valuable mineral resources onsite. The project site has not been delineated as a locally -important mineral resource recovery site on any plans. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known resource, including locally important mineral resources. Therefore, the project will have no impact to mineral resources. Mitigation Measures: None required Page 57 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-57 3.12. NOISE c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels ❑ ❑ ® ❑ existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above El ® 11 El 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 airport, would the project expose people residing ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 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 residing or working in the project area to excessive noise ❑ ❑ ❑ levels? Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR; and SMART Master Plan Noise Study. Noise Setting: Noise sources within the City's Urban Growth Boundary include vehicular traffic, trains and industrial activities such as mechanical equipment and refrigeration units. Freight train service through Petaluma is currently irregular, and thus does not constitute a significant noise source. In the future, the addition of SMART service will contribute to noise levels within the UGB. Per Section 21.040.A.3.a of the City's Implementing Zoning Ordinance, noise generating construction activities are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m, on weekends and holidays. For daily operational noise, the Implementing Zoning Ordinance (Section 21.040 4 A) generally establishes an hourly average level of 60 dBA as the maximum that may be generated on one land use that would be affecting another land use, and the allowable levels are adjusted to account for the ambient noise levels and in no case shall the maximum allowed threshold exceed 75dBA after adjustments are made. Noise Impact Discussion: 3.12(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The City of Petaluma regulates the noise environment through Section 21.040 of the IZO. Residential uses in areas with Ldn between 60 and 65 dBA would generally be acceptable with noise reduction measures or insulation to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dB or less. Page 58 of 79 October 24, 2013 (� Jv Potentially Significant Less than No Would thero ect result In: P 1 Significant Impact with Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the El 11 ® El general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne E] El ® El levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels ❑ ❑ ® ❑ existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above El ® 11 El 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 airport, would the project expose people residing ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 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 residing or working in the project area to excessive noise ❑ ❑ ❑ levels? Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR; and SMART Master Plan Noise Study. Noise Setting: Noise sources within the City's Urban Growth Boundary include vehicular traffic, trains and industrial activities such as mechanical equipment and refrigeration units. Freight train service through Petaluma is currently irregular, and thus does not constitute a significant noise source. In the future, the addition of SMART service will contribute to noise levels within the UGB. Per Section 21.040.A.3.a of the City's Implementing Zoning Ordinance, noise generating construction activities are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m, on weekends and holidays. For daily operational noise, the Implementing Zoning Ordinance (Section 21.040 4 A) generally establishes an hourly average level of 60 dBA as the maximum that may be generated on one land use that would be affecting another land use, and the allowable levels are adjusted to account for the ambient noise levels and in no case shall the maximum allowed threshold exceed 75dBA after adjustments are made. Noise Impact Discussion: 3.12(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The City of Petaluma regulates the noise environment through Section 21.040 of the IZO. Residential uses in areas with Ldn between 60 and 65 dBA would generally be acceptable with noise reduction measures or insulation to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dB or less. Page 58 of 79 October 24, 2013 (� Jv Petaluma General Plan indicates that low density residential land uses are considered normally acceptable in noise environments of 60 dB CNEULd, or less. The General Plan Noise Contours Exhibit (Figure 10-1) indicate that noise levels at the project site are expected to be 60 dB CNEULd, at General Plan build out. Existing Noise Environment The noise environment at the project site results primarily from vehicular noise from the surrounding roadways. Ambient noise levels at the subdivision site and annexation area is dominated by vehicular traffic noise generated along Corona Road and Highway 101. The North West Pacific Railroad (NWPRR) line, which crosses Corona Road approximately Y< mile to the southwest of the site, began hauling freight in July 2011. This rail line has been approved for commuter rail service (SMART), which will increase rail traffic in the future and contribute to the noise environment. Future Noise Environment The future noise environment at the site would be generated primarily from vehicle and rail traffic. The NWPRR at -grade crossing of Corona Road is well over 750 feet southwest of the site, which is where the proposed Corona Road Station will be sited. It is anticipated that noise levels from individual SMART trains would fall somewhere between the noise generated by a BART train and the noise generated by a traditional -diesel-powered train. According to theSMARTDEIR (page 2-13), the future usage of the rail line could include a total of 28 trains per day (14 northbound and 14 southbound) with a service frequency of 30 minutes in peak periods. The projected noise level for passenger rail ranges from 40 to 65 dBA as noted in the SMART DEIR.' For comparison purposes it is assumed that the future Corona Station will generate similar noise levels as the downtown station. The noise report prepared for the SMART Master Plan calculated the noise contours adjacent to the NWPRR line using the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Grade Crossing Noise Model. To complete the model, the SMART trains were assumed to run on 30 -minute intervals between 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM (during the morning commute) and between 5:00 PM and 8:00 PM (during the evening commute), with trains running less frequently during the other daytime hours. At a distance of 200 feet from the track, the noise exposure level from the trains, is less than 45 dBA (Figure 3.7-4), far below that considered normally acceptable. While noise from train horns and warning devices are not regulated by local ordinance because they are safety -warning devices, train horns can be disturbing to residents near at -grade crossings. The noise report prepared for the SMART Master Plan determined that future noise impacts from the train horns will extend between 40 feet and 600 feet from the tracks, depending on the direction (page 3-137). As the proposed subdivision site is more than 750 feet from the track centerline, the potential impacts from noise generated by train horns is expected to be less than significant. Therefore, development of the subdivision site will not expose people to excessive noise levels and potential impact will be less than significant. 3.12(b). Less Than Significant Impact: Construction of the subdivision and the proposed detention basin would result in temporary noise disturbances, including groundborne vibration during site grading and development activities. No pile driving, jack hammering, or extensive work that would generate substantial groundborne vibration is anticipated. Primary noise sources associated with construction include the operation of heavy-duty construction equipment, material delivery, and haul trips. Construction related noise impacts are typically only occasional intrusive and cease once construction is complete. The City's Noise Ordinance establishes standards to minimize the temporary noise impacts associated with construction, such as limitations on the time of day and week when construction activities are acceptable. Adherence to the City's Noise Ordinance will assure that potential noise impacts due to the exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels are less than significant. 3.12(c). Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed long-term use of the subdivision site is residential. This land use would not generate noise levels that would substantially increase the ambient noise environment. As a 31 unit subdivision, the project would not generate enough traffic to create a perceptible change (at least 3 dBA) in traffic noise in the vicinity of the project site. As noted above, the General Plan Noise Contours Exhibit (Figure 10-1) shows that noise levels at the project site are expected to be 60 dB 9 'Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit DEIR: Figure 3.7-4 (Passenger Rail Noise Exposure," prepared November 2005. Page 59 of October 2472313 13 5g CNEULdn at General Plan build out. No substantial long-term increase in ambient noise levels is expected as a result of project implementation. The potential noise sources associated with the occupation of the proposed housing are not expected to be out of character with typical residential uses and would be similar to that of the existing homes in the area. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact to the permanent noise environment. 3.12(d). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: Construction of the project could result in potentially significant short-term noise impacts at nearby sensitive receptors including surrounding residences and the Corona Elementary School. Noise generated during construction would vary depending on the construction phase and the type and amount of equipment used at the construction site. Construction activities that would generate noise include site grading, excavation, hauling of cut material, foundation work, and to a lesser extent framing, and exterior & interior finishing. The highest noise levels would be generated during grading of the site, with lower noise levels occurring during building construction and finishing. The following table presents typical ranges of the energy -equivalent sound noise levels (Leq) at 50 feet, for domestic housing production. Table 5 Construction Phase Noise Levels Construction Phase Construction Equipment Ground Clearing 83 Excavation 88 Foundations 81 Erection 81 Finishing (Paving) 88 Source: US EPA, Legal Compilation on Noise, Vol. 1, p. 2-104, 1973. Typical Ranges of Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet from Construction. The table illustrates that the construction of the project would increase noise levels in the project area over the entirety of the construction period. During construction increased noise levels would be generated on the site and the surrounding land uses by trucks delivering and recovering materials at the site, grading and paving equipment, saws, hammers, the radios and voices of workers, and other typical provisions necessary to construct a residential housing project. When site work (demolition, ground clearing, excavation, paving and foundation work) activities are occurring near adjacent neighbors (east and south of proposed subdivision site), daytime levels can be expected to exceed existing noise levels. When construction occurs towards the interior of the site noise levels at the surrounding existing residences will diminish, however, noise produced by construction activities would remain audible and is expected to exceed existing noise levels at the adjacent homes during the entire construction period. These impacts are significant even though short-term. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 shall restrict construction noise to daytime, waking hours; protecting the neighborhood in the more sensitive evening and nighttime hours. Mitigation measure NO1-2 requires the designation of a Noise Disturbance Coordinator. The project will result in temporary noise impacts associated with construction activities. These temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels would cease once construction was complete. Although the project will generate temporary increases above levels existing without the project, with adherence to the City's Noise Ordinance and Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 as set forth below potential noise impacts will reduced to less than significant levels. Construction of the proposed ±4.6 acre detention basin will result in approximately 65,400 to 81,010 cubic yards of soil removal. Using a 12 cubic yard Super Dump truck, up to 13,500 truck trips will be needed to haul the soils out. Mitigation Measure AQ -2 specifies the route and limits the hours that trucks hauling soils from the detention basin site may utilize, in order to minimize impacts associated with haul truck trips on sensitive receptors. With Mitigation Measure AQ -2, noise impacts associated with soil removal from the detention basin site would be less than significant. Page 60 of 79 October 24, 2013 �� 6 3.12(e -f). No Impact: The project site is not located within a private airstrip, an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and would therefore not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. The Community Noise Equivalency Level (CNEL) noise contours from the Petaluma Municipal Airport do not affect the subject site. The project would not expose people residing or working onsite to significant noise levels generated by the Petaluma Municipal Airport. Therefore, noise from the Petaluma Airport will have no impact to people residing or working onsite. Mitigation Measures: N0I-1. Due to the proximity of sensitive receptors (residences and the Corona Elementary School) to the development areas (subdivision and detention basin), construction activities shall be required to comply with following and noted accordingly on construction contracts: 1. Construction Hours/Scheduling: The following are required to limit construction activities to the portion of the day when the number of persons in the adjacent sensitive receptors are lowest: a. Construction activities for all phases of construction, including servicing of construction equipment shall only be permitted during the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and on all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma. b. Delivery of materials or equipment to the site and truck traffic coming to and from the site is restricted to the same construction hours specified above. Trucks hauling from the detention basin site are subject to the more restrictive hours listed at AQ -2. 2. Construction Equipment Mufflers and Maintenance: All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained. 3. Idling Prohibitions: All equipment and vehicles shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited. 4. Equipment Location and Shielding: All stationary noise -generating construction equipment, such as air compressors, shall be located as far as practical from the adjacent homes. Acoustically shield such equipment when it must be located near adjacent residences. 5. Quiet Equipment Selection: Select quiet construction equipment, particularly air compressors, whenever possible. Motorized equipment shall be outfitted with proper mufflers in good working order. 6. Staging and Equipment Storage`. The equipment storage location shall be sited as far as possible from nearby sensitive receptors. N01-2. Noise Disturbance Coordinator: Developer shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator' who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. This individual would most likely be the contractor or a contractor's representative. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and would require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. The telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. Page 61 of 79 October 24, 2013 �� �7 3.13. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Would theroject: Significant with Significant Impact p 1 Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Induce substantial growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through El El 0 El extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of El El E] 19 replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? El 11 11 1E Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR; City of Petaluma 2009-2014 Housing Element. Population and Housing Setting The 2025 General Plan proposes development of approximately 6,000 additional residential units and a buildout population of approximately 72,700. This represents an annual growth rate of nearly 1.2% per year. The project would add 30 new market rate dwelling units. The project is identified as Site 1 within the City of Petaluma Residential Land Inventory Opportunity Sites, Appendix A to the City of Petaluma 2009-2014 Housing Element, prepared 2009. Population and Housing Impact Discussion: 3.13(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The project's 30 new residential units, as proposed by the subdivision, are not considered to be substantial as the units were anticipated by the General Plan 2025 population projections and growth estimates, and as the General Plan EIR analyzed this level of development for the site. Likewise, the project is on land that is currently within the Urban Growth Boundary and has been since 1987. While Monica Way, from Andover Way, will be extended to provide public access to the site, the project does not extend roadways in a manner that would promote further development. City services and infrastructure (water and sewer) will be provided by this project to abutting properties at 496, 520, and 522 Corona Road (Assessor's Parcels 137-061-007, 008, and 010). The extension of these services are not growth inducing as they serve existing homes and will not result in further development beyond what is proposed by the subject project. A substantial population growth or infrastructure expansion will not be induced by the project. The proposed project consists of 30 new residential units that will serve approximately 83 residents, assuming an occupancy rate of 2.75 people per unit. This projected population is not considered a substantial increase and is well within General Plan 2025 population projections. As a residential development, the project will not induce growth beyond what is proposed. Therefore, the project will have no direct or indirect impact to growth inducement in the project area. 3.13(b -c). No Impact: The Project will not displace a substantial number of existing housing units or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Other than the three existing residential units along Corona Road, and the existing 1900 era farmhouse, which will preserved, the annexation area is currently vacant. No housing units or people will be displaced by development of the proposed subdivision. The project implements the City's Housing Element by contributing 31 at market units to the existing housing stock within the City of Petaluma. The project will have no impacts that displace people or existing housing. Mitigation Measures: None required. Page 62 of 79 October 24, 2013 3.14. PUBLIC SERVICES: Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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) Fire protection? _ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR. Public Services Setting: The City charges one-time impact fees on new private development in order to offset the cost of improving or expanding City facilities to accommodate the demand generated by new development. Impact fees are used to fund the construction or expansion of needed capital improvements. Petaluma collects impact fees for open space, parkland, and others. Development impact fees are necessary in order to finance required public facilities and service improvements and to pay for new development's fair share of the costs of the required public facilities and service improvements. Public Services Impact Discussion: 3.14(a -b). Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located adjacent to an existing neighborhood that is currently well served by public services. Additional fire service and police calls may occur as a result of the project due to the 30 new residential units proposed. However, the project will be subject to the payment of development impact fees, including the Fire Suppression Facilities Impact Fee to offset the impacts to fire facilities and services and the Law Enforcement Facilities Impact Fee for policing services. General Plan policy 7-P-19 sets a four minute travel time for emergency response within the city. The project is located one-third of a mile from Fire Station 2, at 1001 N. McDowell Boulevard at Corona Road. The project is well within the response radii (see GP EIR figure 3.4-2) and travel time will be less than 4 minutes. As the Traffic Impact Study (see discussion 3.14 a & b below) notes the project is consistent with the General Plan 2025, because of the redundancy of approach access, the ability of emergency response vehicles to override traffic controls with lights, sirens, and signal pre-emption, and their ability to travel in opposing travel lanes in congested condition, the addition of project trips to the adjacent grid street network is not expected to cause a reduction in travel speeds sufficient to cause significant delays for emergency vehicles. Although additional fire and/or police service calls may occur as a result of the project, substantial new fire protection or police protection facilities will not be warranted to maintain necessary levels of service. As a standard condition of project approval, the applicant shall pay all development impact fees applicable to a residential development project, including fire suppression facilities and law enforcement facilities impact fees. These funds are sufficient to offset any cumulative increase in demands to fire and police protection services and assure that impacts are less than significant. Page 63 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 —4E 3.14(c). Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered school facilities. The project site is located within the Waugh Elementary School District and in close proximity to the Corona Creek Elementary School. The General Plan projects that the Waugh School District (elementary) and the Petaluma Joint Union High School District (high school) will experience a decrease in enrollments by General Plan Buildout due to a shift in the population demographics. Based on current capacities it is expected that sufficient facilities are in place to accommodate any increased enrollment associated with development of the subject project. The project is subject to the payment of statutory school impact fees to offset any cumulative impacts on the school system. The Corona Road Subdivision Project will have less than significant impacts to schools. 3.14(d). Less Than Significant Impact: The City has adopted a citywide parks standard of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The existing Corona Creek Park Trail is located immediately south and east of the project site and provides recreation opportunities to future residences. The subject subdivision does not constitute a substantial growth in population and existing park facilities are expected to be sufficient to meet active and passive recreational demands of residents. A substantial adverse impact to park facilities is not expected to occur from implementation of the subject project. Therefore, impacts to park lands due to the subject annexation, proposed subdivision, and detention basin, will be less than significant. 3.14(e). No Impact: The Project will not result in substantial adverse impacts associated with any other public facilities. The proposed project area is located adjacent to an established neighborhood to the east and south and is well served by existing public utilities. The project will not generate a substantial increase in demands that warrant the expansion or construction of new public facilities. Therefore, there will be no impacts to other public facilities from project implementation. Mitigation Measures: None required Page 64 of 79/ //'' October 24, 2013 j —Z T 3.15. RECREATION Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial 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 adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ © ❑ Sources: 2025 General Plan: Figure 6-1 Parks and Open Space: and EIR. Recreation Setting: The public parks and recreational opportunities within the UGB accommodate a wide range of uses and encompass nearly 1,400 acres. Activities offered at parks and open spaces include both active and passive recreation. Park land development and open space acquisition impact fees are required and help to mitigate any potential impacts of the project on parks and open space. Recreation Impact Discussion: 3.15(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed subdivision will likely result in a subtle increase in the use of the existing trail along Corona Creek, due to its proximity to the project site. This trail has sufficient capacity to accommodate additional use by neighborhood residents. Increased patronage to Corona Creek and/or other parks within the UGB from new residents of the proposed subdivision would not result in substantial physical deterioration of facilities nor would deterioration be accelerated. The project would not substantially increase the use of existing parks or recreational facilities and impacts would be less than significant. 3.15(b). Less Than Significant Impact: The project does not propose development of any recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The project does includes provision for the expansion of the Corona Creek trail along Riesling way at the frontage of the detention basin to provide connectivity to the nearby Corona Creek Elementary School and the existing path adjacent to Corona Creek. Development of the frontage path along Riesling Way, as proposed, would not result in impacts that would have a physical effect on the environment. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact due to the construction of recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures: None required. Page 65 of 79 / C October 24, 2013 -b Would the project: Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass El ® El Eltransit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an,_applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and --travel -demand measures, or -other ❑ ® ❑ ❑ standards established by the 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 change in location ❑ ❑ ❑ that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ D Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such ❑ ❑ ® ❑ facilities? Sources: 2025 General Plan and EIR. GP Figure 5-1; and Traffic Study for the Corona Road Residential Development, prepared by Dowling Associate, Inc., February 25, 2011. Transportation and Circulation Setting: The City of Petaluma is bisected by U.S. 101, which serves as the primary route between San Francisco and Marin and Sonoma Counties. U.S. 101 accommodates over 90,000 vehicles per day within Petaluma. The circulation system within the City of Petaluma consists of approximately 140 miles of streets including, arterials, collectors, connectors, and local streets. The major arterials serving the project site are Corona Road and Sonoma Mountain Parkway. Corona Road is a country road that has been retained as a rural roadway, north of Sonoma Mountain Parkway, by City policies dating to the 198Os; it has no sidewalk, curb, or bike path, but rather retains a rural, tree -lined feel, with an open drainage ditch. Sonoma Mountain Parkway is a two lane arterial located south of the subdivision site. Mauro Pietro Drive via Andover Way to Monica Lane provides residential street access from Sonoma Mountain Parkway into the existing neighborhood (See Figure 1 of the 2011 Traffic Study). All of these roadways are public residential streets and typically have a sidewalk, street tree planting strip, curb, gutter, and parking on each side. The proposed subdivision, via the proposed public sidewalks and the public pedestrian and bicycle path, will create a connection from the existing neighborhood to Corona Road. The project will be subject to the payment of development impact fees, including the Traffic Mitigation fee to offset its contribution to citywide traffic. Page 66 of 79 October 24, 2013 The Petaluma General Plan 2025 was adopted in May 2008 and specifies a Level of Service (LOS) standard for streets wherein the minimum acceptable operation is LOS D. Policy 5-P-10 states, "Maintain an intersection level of service (LOS) standard for motor vehicle circulation that ensures efficient traffic flow and supports multi -modal mobility goals. LOS should be maintained at Level D or better for motor vehicles due to traffic from any development project." Transportation and Circulation Impact Discussion: 16(a -b). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The traffic study for the proposed subdivision was prepared by Dowling Associate, Inc., February 2011, and evaluated the potential traffic impacts of the project. The study estimated that the project would generate an average of 354 daily vehicle trips per day, including 31 trips during the morning peak hour and 37 trips during the evening peak hour. The traffic study evaluated the potential impacts of project traffic at six intersections under existing volumes with and without the proposed project as well as under Future traffic volumes at GP Buildout. The six intersections evaluated include: 1. Corona Road at Petaluma Boulevard North 4. Corona Road at Ely Road North 2. Corona Road at North McDowell Boulevard 5. Mauro Pietro Drive at Sonoma Mountain Parkway 3. Corona Road at Sonoma Mountain Parkway 6. Ely Road North at Sonoma Mountain Parkway Existing Condition The traffic study finds that the six intersections are currently operating acceptably in the Existing Condition scenario with LOS D or better, as seen in Table 2 below. Table 6: LOS - Existing Condition Intersections Control AM Peak -Hour PM Peak -Hour LOS (Delay or v/C) 1 Corona Rd at Petaluma Blvd N Signal D 39.9 D 38.1 2 Corona Rd at N McDowell Rd Signal C 34.2 C 32.6 3 Corona Rd at Sonoma Mnt, Pkwya Roundabout C 64.6% B 62.7% 4 Corona Rd at Ely Rd N All Way Stop 8 11.3 C (17.9 5 Mauro Pietro Dr at Sonoma Mnt. Pk Side Street Stop B 11.3 B 10.6 6 Ely Rd N at Sonoma Mountain Pkwy Signal B 14.6) B (16.6 Source: Dowling Associates, Inc. using SynchroO Build 773, Rev 8. a) Roundabout LOS is calculated using the intersection capacity utilization method, a volume to capacity (v/C) ratio b LOS and delay is reported for the worst case approach, which is Mauro Pietro Drive's westbound approach. Baseline Condition (Pipeline Scenario) In the baseline condition which is traffic associated with pipeline projects, those in process, under construction, or in review, are added to the existing condition), it is expected that all study intersections will operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the exception of the all -way stop controlled Corona Road at Ely Road North, which would operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour, regardless of the proposed project. With the project, intersection 4 would experience slight increase in delay from 39 seconds to 40.3 seconds (Table 5 & Table 8). The proposed project would add 5 trips (0.40% increase) to the subject intersection in the PM peak hour and cause an average delay increase of 1.3 seconds (see page 16 of the 2011 Traffic Study). Table 8 below shows the Baseline Condition with Project. Table 7: LOS - Baseline Condition with Proposed Proiect Intersections Control AM Peak -Hour PM Peak -Hour LOS (Delay or v/C) 1 Corona Rd at Petaluma Blvd N Signal D 47.5 D (48.4) 2 Corona Rd at N McDowell Rd Signal C (35.2) D (42.3) 3 Corona Rd at Sonoma Mnt, Pkwya Roundabout C (70.3%) C (69.9%) 4 Corona Rd at Ely Rd N All Way Stop B (12.9) <:E 40.3 5 Mauro Pietro Dr at Sonoma Mnt. 'Pkwy Side Street Stop B (11.9) B (11.1) 6 Ely Rd N at Sonoma Mountain Pkwy Signal B 14.8) B 16.7 Source: Dowling Associates, Inc. using SynchroO Build 773, Rev 8. a) Roundabout LOS is calculated using the intersection capacity utilization method, a volume to capacity (v/C) ratio b LOS and delay is reported for the worst case approach, which is Mauro Pietro Drive's westbound approach, Page 67 of 79 October 24, 2013 3 4,7' The Corona Road at Ely Road North intersection is an all way stop intersection located outside of the City limits and outside the Urban Growth Boundary. In a March 3, 2011 correspondence, the County Department of Transportation and Public Works states that they have no plans to signalize this intersection and requests no mitigation. The project's contribution to this intersection is minimal and would not result in a further deterioration to this intersection LOS beyond what would occur without the project. The project would not cause any of the project area intersections to deteriorate to an LOS threshold below the City's standards. Therefore, the project's impacts to LOS at during the baseline condition (pipeline scenario) would be less than significant. General Plan Buildout Under the General Plan Buildout Cumulative 2025 conditions, without the proposed project, the study intersections would operate at acceptable LOS levels during both AM and PM peak hours with three exceptions (See the Traffic Report, Table 9 Level of Service -Cumulative). The Corona Road -Petaluma Boulevard North intersection would experience LOS E in the PM peak hour. The Corona -North McDowell Boulevard intersection would operate at LOS E in the AM peak hour. The all -way stop controlled Corona Road -Ely Road North intersection would further degrade to LOS F in both peak hours. When the project -generated traffic was added to the Cumulative conditions and when the traffic signal splits at the Corona Road -Petaluma Boulevard North intersection were optimized in the AM and PM peak hours (as allowed in the City of Petaluma's Guide for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies), the resulting intersection levels of service continued to be at acceptable LOS levels during both AM and PM peak hours except at the Corona Road -North McDowell Boulevard intersection which would remain at LOS E in the AM peak hour and at the all -way stop controlled Corona Road -Ely Road North intersection which would remain at LOS F in both peak hours, as seen in Table 8 below. Table 8: LOS - Build Out Cumulative Condition with Proposed Project Intersections Control AM Peak -Hour PM Peak -Hour LOS (Delay or v/C) 1 Corona Rd at Petaluma Blvd N Signal D (54.5) D 49.5) ` 2 Corona Rd at N McDowell Rd Signal 58:2 D 43.4 3 Corona Rd at Sonoma Mnt, Pkwy a Roundabout B 63.3% C 69.5% 4 Corona Rd at Ely Rd N All Way Stop 634 F 10ff:9 5 Mauro Pietro Dr at Sonoma Mnt. �Pkwy Side Street Stop B (12.5) B(12.9 6 Ely Rd N at Sonoma Mountain Pkwy Signal C 20.6 C (24.8) Source: Dowling Associates, Inc. using Synchro(D Build 773, Rev 8. a) Roundabout LOS is calculated using the intersection capacity utilization method, a volume to capacity (v/C) ratio b) LOS and delay is reported for the worst case approach, which is Mauro Pietro Drive's westbound approach. c Analysis reflects traffic signal split optimization allowed per section 3.5.4 of the City's Guide for TIAs. The General Plan 2025 EIR previously identified that the Corona Road -North McDowell Boulevard intersection would operate unacceptably at LOS E during the morning peak period. Because the General Plan 2025 EIR was unable to identify any feasible mitigation measure to achieve acceptable operation, this impact was identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan 2025 EIR and a statement of overriding considerations for General Plan adoption was approved by the City Council on May 18, 2008. This project is consistent with the General Plan 2025, and does not increase the severity of the cumulative traffic impact at Corona Road -North McDowell Road from that identified in the General Plan EIR. The project's contribution to the Corona Road -Ely Road North intersection would be at most 5 trips during peak hours, representing up to 0.34% total trips at this intersection (see page 20 of the 2011 Traffic Study). The Corona Road at Ely Road North intersection is an all way stop intersection located outside of the City limits and the Urban Growth Boundary. In a March 3, 2011 correspondence, the County Department of Transportation and Public Works states that they have no plans to signalize this intersection and requests no mitigation. The project would not result in additional impacts beyond what is projected under the no project condition. Therefore, the project's cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project will contribute an estimated 354 additional trips per day, including 31 AM and 37 PM Page 68 of 79 6 6 OCIo6er 24, 2013 13- b peak hour vehicles trip, which will not cause a level of service to further deteriorate or substantially increase delays at intersections in the project vicinity. Therefore impacts to LOS will be less than significant. Construction of the proposed ±4.6 acre detention basin will result in approximately 65,400 to 81,010 cubic yards of soil removal, depending on the side slope designed. Using a 12 cubic yard Super Dump truck, up to 13,500 truck trips will be needed to haul the soils out. Mitigation Measure AQ -2 specifies the route that trucks hauling soils from the detention basin site shall utilize, in order to minimize impacts associated with haul truck trips, specifically to school sites. With Mitigation Measure AQ -2, construction of the detention basin, impacts would be less than significant. Road Repair Due to the number of haul truck trips required for the excavation of the proposed detention basin, there is a potential for road surfaces to be impacted. In order to minimize potential impacts associated with haul truck trips, once the basin is complete and prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvement and issuance of the final 20% of certificates of occupancy, dig out repair to any damaged street sections along Riesling and Fieldstone and a minimum of a type II slurry seal and re -striping is required pursuant to Measure TRAF-1. If the trucks damage a street over and beyond what a dig out/slurry seal repair can fix, at the discretion of the City Engineer, a 2 -inch grind and overlay shall be required. With implementation of TRAF-1 potential adverse - roadway surface conditions will be corrected and impacted reduced to levels below significance. Parking Each residential lot shall be held to the standard Zoning Ordinance requirement of one covered and two uncovered on-site parking spaces. A condition of Tentative Map approval will ensure that the existing house at Lot 6 is provided with one covered parking space prior to Final Map approval. Proposed project public streets A and B are designed to accommodate on -street parking on both sides of the street (except at corners) and three additional public parking spaces are proposed in landscaped parking "islands" at each cul- de-sac. Thus, the project proposes adequate parking for both residents and visitors. 3.16(c). No Impact: The project will have no impact on air traffic patterns, given the nature and location of the residential development, which is well outside of the established airport flight pattern. 3.16(d). Less Than Significant Impact: The Traffic Impact Study reviewed the adequacy of sight distance for vehicles exiting the proposed residences onto Corona Road. Corona Road is a narrow and rural road with the drainage channel between the roadway and the project property line. The speed limit of Corona Road is 30 mph. The stopping sight distance for vehicles approaching the driveway from Corona Road is approximately 500 feet, which is equivalent to the stopping sight distance standard for a 55 mph design speed, while the standard for a 30 mph design speed is 200 feet. The study found sight distances for any vehicles exiting the site onto Corona Road to be adequate if no visual obstructions exist along the project frontage. The proposed street trees as shown on TM -12 are sufficiently set back so as not to obstruct view from the project driveways along Corona Road. Access into the project site for residences that do not front onto Corona Road is provided from a proposed extension of Monica Way, via Andover Way within the existing residential development east of the project site. Other than Corona Road, the primary arterial serving the project site is from Sonoma Mountain Highway. Traffic will enter the residential neighborhood from Mauro Pietro Drive or Ely Road and connect to Andover Way before taking access into the site from Monica Way. The ingress/egress at Monica Way is stop sign controlled. As described above, the project will not cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The project's design provides sufficient set back from roadways and maintains visibility around corners. The preliminary landscaping plan considers visibility in the location proposed trees. As proposed, there are no hazards that impede or block visibility or represent an incompatible design feature. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impact resulting from site design hazards. 3.16(e). Less Than Significant Impact: The project's internal circulation plan has been reviewed and meets all standard conditions imposed by the Petaluma Public Works and Fire Departments. Site circulation was determined to be adequate, including sufficient street widths on the project's public streets to allow for fire Page 69 of 79 October 24, 2013 t3-49 truck turn around and sufficient access to private driveways. Therefore emergency vehicle access is adequate and potential impacts will be less than significant. 3.16(f). Less Than Significant Impact: Facilities for alternative modes of transportation are expected to adequately serve the project. There is no proposed aspect of the project that would decrease performance or safety of existing alternative transportation facilities. Bicycle Facilities Existing bicycle facilities in the project vicinity include a Class I off-street path along Corona Creek and Class II striped on -street bicycle routes along Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Ely Road, and Maria Drive; the nearest connection to this Class 11 network is at the intersection of the Corona Creek Trail and Sonoma Mountain Parkway. The subdivision is adjacent to an existing neighborhood, which has been developed with sidewalks and pedestrian access. The exception being that Corona Road is a narrow country road without sidewalk or bike path, as City policies have dictated. Pedestrian connectivity within the proposed subdivision will be provided via concrete sidewalks that interconnect to the exiting pedestrian facilities within the adjacent neighborhood. Figure 5-2 of the Petaluma General Plan: the Proposed and Existing Bicycle Facilities Map shows a proposed Class II (on -street, striped lane) along Corona Road. Typically, a new development with frontage along a route with a proposed bicycle facility would be required to construct improvement with project development. In the case of Corona Road, however, staff is not requiring any bicycle facility improvements due to the following: • Because of Corona Ely Specific Plan designation of this stretch of Corona Road as a Scenic Country Corridor (Figure 4-2) and policies such as 31 and 33 which direct preservation of the existing roadway tree canopy, the roadway's typical rural features, and the overall rural feeling of Corona Road; • Corona Road is and will remain within the jurisdiction of Sonoma County (as the UGB line runs along the east side of the roadway); and Corona Creek Trail provides for multi -use opportunities in close proximity to the subject subdivision. As a condition of project approval, the Public Works Department will require irrevocable offer of dedication/easement for the Corona Road right of way to accommodate a future condition when the vision for Corona Road is no longer that of a rural country road. Thus, the project, as proposed and conditioned, will accommodate the long-term goal of Figure 5-2 of the Petaluma General Plan should City policies change in the future and Corona Road becomes a standard City street or should a satisfactory means of providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities while maintaining rural character be discovered. On this basis, staff will recommend that the City Council find the project as conditioned above consistent with the General Plan bicycle policies. Public Transit Existing Petaluma Transit stops are located both a 1/5 -mile from the subdivision site at Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Maria Drive (clockwise Route 3 and counterclockwise Route 33) and a''/z-mile away at North McDowell Boulevard and Youngstown Mobile Home Park (Route 2). An existing Sonoma County Transit stop is located 1/5° of a mile away at Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Maria Drive (Route 44 to Santa Rosa). An existing Golden Gate Transit is less than a ''/z mile away at Ely Road and York Way (Route 74 to San Francisco). Additionally, the project is located within an aerial 1/4 -mile of the Corona Road SMART station (the distance by sidewalk is less than a ''/z -mile). This is one of the two planned Petaluma stations for the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) Master Plan, which will ultimately provide passenger rail services from Cloverdale to Larkspur, where the Golden Gate Ferry connects to San Francisco. The first segment, 37 miles from downtown San Rafael to Railroad Square in Santa Rosa, will connect the two largest cities in the North Bay and all of the cities in between including Petaluma. Passenger train service has been scheduled to begin in late 2014, though currently a one to two year deferral appears likely both to accommodate permitting and regulatory approval time lines and because a deferral will help close a budgetary gap. Once the SMART train is operational, a bicycle -pedestrian path paralleling the Page 70 of 79 —7 r` October 24, 2013 ) 3 — 1 U tracks will extend along the length; residents of the project will have easy access to this path by way of the existing off-street path along Corona Creek. Construction of the Corona Road SMART station is planned as the second phase of development for the SMART Plan and will be built as additional revenues become available, seemingly sometime after 2017. Alternative Transit Summary The Project conforms to adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting public transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and would not decrease the performance of such facilities. Proposed facilities include sidewalks within the subdivision, a sidewalk along the detention basin frontage to Riesling Way, and connectivity to trails and bike routes in the project vicinity. All modes of transportation including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian are expected to adequately serve the project and nothing about the project decreases the performance or safety of existing alternative transportation facilities. Mitigation Measures: TRAF-1 In order to minimize impacts associated with haul truck trips, once the basin is complete and prior to acceptance of the subdivision improvement and issuance of the final 20% of certificates of occupancy, the developer shall complete dig out repair to any damaged street sections along Riesling and Fieldstone and a minimum of a type II slurry seal and re-striping.If the trucks damage a street over and beyond what a dig out/slurry seal repair can fix, at the discretion of the City Engineer, a 2 - inch grind and overlay shall be required. Page 71 of 79 —/ October 24, 2013 `?j — ( 1 3.17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Would theect: j rosignificant with Significant Impact P Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of ❑ ❑ F] ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing ❑ © ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve El El © El project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the El El ® El that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? D Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted El❑ ® El to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and El El ® El related to solid waste? Sources: 2025 GP and EIR; Water Resource and Conservation 2010 UWMP; Sonoma County Water Agency 2010 UWMP; Preliminary Drainage Report for this project by Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Inc., dated May 5, 2009; Corona Subdivision XP -Storm Evaluation, prepared by WEST Consultants, Inc., July 13, 2012. Utilities and Service Systems Settings: The City charges one-time impact fees on new private development in order to offset the cost of improving or expanding City facilities to accommodate the project. Impact fees are used to help fund the construction or expansion of needed capital improvements due to new development. Petaluma collects impact fees for open space, park land, traffic impact, wastewater, water capacity, storm drain, public art, and others. In addition to the subdivision, the proposed annexation includes 3 lots with existing single-family residences. These homes are currently outside of City limits are not connected to City utilities. As part of the annexation process City utility hookups will be extended to these residences. Water Service System The City's water supply is sourced from the Russian River Water System and supplemented with local groundwater. Water from the Russian River Water System is obtained via the Petaluma Aqueduct through a contract with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA). The City's Water Resource and Conservation Division (WR&C) provides municipal water service to approximately 60,000 customers and is therefore must comply with the Urban Water Management Plan Act, which requires the preparation of an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five years. The most recent UWMP prepared for the WR&C was completed for the 2010 cycle and was adopted on June 6, 2011. Page 72 of 79 October 24, 2013 -3 - 72-- The City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) updates information from General Plan 2025 background and environmental documents and extended the term of water demand analysis through 2035. The 2010 UWMP was determined to be consistent with the General Plan 2025. The UWMP includes a water supply/demand analysis based on population trends and land uses set forth in the 2025 General Plan, the City's existing water supply contract with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), and planned City water recycling and water conservation programs. SCWA adopted its 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (Brown & Caldwell June 2011) on June 21, 2011. The SCWA holds water right permits for the diversion of surface water from the Russian River with a limit of 75,000 acre-feet per year. Instream flow requirements have also been established to protect fish and wildlife species (Decisions 1610) and recreation. Based on regional water supply availability, the SCWA expects to be able to increase annual water deliveries to Petaluma from approximately 7,200 acre-feet in 2010 to 11,400 acre-feet by 2035. Based on the evaluation of future Russian River supply including, minimum in -stream flow requirements, SCWA expects to obtain water rights approvals necessary to increase its total diversions above 75,000 ac- ft/yr by 2027 and to 80,000 ac-ft/yr by 2035. This assumption is based on the most likely outcome of decisions by regulatory agencies and implementation of the Restructured Agreement (Executed in 2006) and proposed improvements to the water delivery system. To assure that the City of Petaluma has sufficient water supplies to meet increased water demand, the General Plan requires routine monitoring of water supplies against actual use and evaluation for each new development project (GP Policy 8-P-4). Wastewater Treatment Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility treats all wastewater generated by the City of Petaluma and unincorporated Sonoma County community of Penngrove. The collection system is comprised of more than 190 miles of underground piping and nine (9) pump stations. The Facility's treatment capacity is about 6.7 million gallons per day (average dry weather flow). The facility treats approximately 5 million gallons per day. As such there is sufficient capacity to treat additional wastewater. During the summer, recycled water is introduced to the City's recycled water system and is used for irrigation of 800 acres of agricultural lands, two golf courses, and a vineyard. In the winter, secondary treated wastewater is conveyed to the Petaluma River. Storm Drains Within the City of Petaluma storm drains convey runoff from impervious surfaces such as streets, sidewalks, and buildings to gutters that drain to creeks and the Petaluma River and ultimately the San Pablo Bay. This water is untreated and carries with it any contaminants picked up along the way such as solvents, oils, fuels and sediment. The City has implemented a storm drain labeling program to provide a visual reminder that storm drains are for rain water only. The City's Stormwater Management and Pollution Control Ordinance, set forth in Chapter 15.80 of the City's Municipal Code, establishes the standard requirements and controls on the storm drain system. All existing and proposed development must adhere to the City's Stormwater Management and Pollution Control Ordinance, as well as the policies set forth in the General Plan including: 8 -P -30C: On-site and off-site improvements, deemed necessary by the City to reduce the surface water impacts associated with a specific development proposal shall be designed, constructed, and maintained in perpetuity at the cost of the development associated with said impacts. 8 -P -33A: Any project within an area subject to inundation in a 1% (100 -year) storm event shall include site specific analysis of impacts and identification of mitigations. 8 -P -37J: Projects may construct detention/retention facilities as mitigation for surface water impacts, so long as the improvements result in an improvement to the pre -project conditions by way of a net reduction in storm water elevations and downstream flows. Page 73 of 79 October 24, 2013 13-73 Utilities and Service Systems Impact Discussion: 3.17(a). Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not cause or exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board or require the expansion of existing or construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. Estimated wastewater generation of the subject project is within capacities of sanitary sewer lines and the City's wastewater treatment plant as discussed in subsections 3.171b and e below. There are no proposed industrial or other uses that would result in generation of wastewater that would require special treatment or which would have constituents that would exceed applicable standards. Therefore, the project will have no impacts that exceed wastewater treatment requirements. 3.17(b). Less Than Significant Impact: The amount of water expected to be needed by this project and the amount of wastewater expected to be generated by the project is consistent with the service needs anticipated by the Petaluma General Plan and will not require the construction of new supply or treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. A condition of approval will require that the applicant pay applicable City Water and Wastewater Capacity fees to fund its share for existing facilities and planned improvements. Theproposedsubdivision site will connect to stub outs for water and sewer located adjacent to the easternmost property line at Monica Way. The existing sanitary sewer and domestic water lines that currently stub at Monica Way are both 8 -inch diameter pipes and will be extended as part of the development of the proposed subdivision. These utilities will be sited within the proposed Public Street A and B to serve subdivision lots, and will continue along proposed lot lines through the subdivision to connect to the existing residences along Corona Road. Wastewater flows will be conveyed to the Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility, which has sufficient operating capacity to handle the minimal additional flows generated by the subject project. There would be no new construction or expansion of domestic water or wastewater facilities as part of the proposed project. Therefore, the project would have less than significant impacts to wastewater treatment capacities. (Also see response 3.17(d) below for discussion on water facility impacts). 3.17(c). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed 4 -acre detention basin that is part of the subject project is sized to accommodate stormwater runoff and protect the subdivision site from inundation. As proposed, the detention basin has sufficient capacity to reduce flooding within the neighborhood adjacent to Corona Creek. The detention basin will be located on the currently vacant parcel immediately north of Riesling Road and west of Corona Creek, within the Urban Separator. According to the Corona Subdivision XP- Storm Evaluation, without the proposed detention basin, the 100 - year water surface elevation would increase by 0.41 feet in the vicinity of the project due to fill of the Corona Subdivision site. Peak discharges of Corona Creek would increase by about 20 cubic feet per second and raise the downstream surface elevation by 0.01 feet on the Petaluma River. The proposed detention basin would reduce the 100 -year surface water elevation in the vicinity of Corona Creek by 0.60 feet and reduce downstream surface elevation of the Petaluma River by 0.02 feet. The proposed detention basin would prevent flooding on the subdivision site and in the project vicinity during the 100 -year storm event. As proposed, the maximum 100 -year surface elevation for the detention basin would be 49.71 feet, with a maximum depth of 4.61 feet and 2.39 feet of freeboard. For the 10 -year storm event, the surface elevation for the detention basin would be 47.31 feet, with a maximum depth of 2.21 feet and 4.79 feet of freeboard. The proposed subdivision development will contribute storm water flows from building roofs, pavement and sidewalks. As proposed the project includes an onsite storm drain system that connect with the existing storm drain system in a manner that is consistent with the pre -development conditions in terms of runoff quantities. Storm water will be managed through the development of storm drains onsite that range from 6 to 24 inches, as deemed appropriate. Onsite storm drains will connect to the existing 24 -inch storm drain located within Monica Lane, which conveys storm water to Corona Creek. The flow pattern of proposed onsite storm drains largely mimics the pre -construction hydrology, by conveying flows in a southeast direction. Page 74 of 79 October 24, 2013 J "-� An existing 24 -inch storm drain line is located at the end of Monica Lane; this is the proposed connection point for the subdivision portion of the project. The westerly portion of the annexation area, including the existing homes along Corona Road, drains to a County maintained ditch running along Corona Road. The proposed project will not increase runoff to the drainage ditch relative to the existing condition. Rather, the subdivision site will be improved with onsite storm drains that detain runoff and discharge to the existing 24 -inch storm drain within Monica Lane. The following measure, UTIL-1 will ensure that onsite storm drains are sized appropriately to accommodate peak flows without adversely impacting storm drain facilities. With implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 potential impacts to storm drains will be reduced to less than significant levels. In addition, Mitigation Measures set forth under the Hydrology discussion HYDRO -1 through HYDRO -4, as well as those under Biological Resources BIO -5 through BIO -8 will also reduce potential impacts associated with the proposed detention basin development. Additionally, a condition of approval will require that the project pay the City Stormwater Drainage Impact fee. With mitigation herein and measure UTIL-1 below, the Project will not result in significant environmental impacts due to the expansion of existing storm water drainage facilities or construction of new facilities. Onsite grading will be conducted in a manner that mimics the storm flows of pre -developed conditions. As described above under the Hydrology and Water Quality discussion, the proposed fill of the subdivision site will be offset by the proposed detention basin, which is sized to reduce surface water elevations below existing elevation for both Corona Creek and the Petaluma River. As such, the storm drain needs of the subdivision site as well as the surrounding area will be reduced. New construction and expanded drainage facilities will have less than significant impacts with mitigation. 3.17(d). Less Than Significant Impacts: During construction of the abutting Liberty Farms subdivision, an 8 -inch water main was placed in Monica Way and stubbed to the property line. Water service to the proposed subdivision and 3 existing lots that are part of the annexation area will extend from this stub out. The proposed subdivision and prezone is within the urban growth boundary and is within the density range anticipated by the general plan. In evaluating the sufficiency of water supplies to meet existing water demands in addition to water demand generated by the proposed project, the City has compared General Plan 2025 projected water demand to actual use through December 2012. The results of that comparison find that potable water demand is well within the available SCWA supply, both for this project, and for cumulative demand through 2035 as set forth in the 2010 UWMP. The 2010 Urban Water Management Plan updated the General Plan 2025 water analysis and further refined a water supply program that relies upon water from SCWA, recycled water (potable offset), and conservation. As noted in General Plan 2025 Policies 8 -P -5-C and 8-P-19, the City also anticipated continuing use of groundwater to meet emergency needs and to offset peak demands. Per Policy 8-P-4 of the Petaluma General Plan 2025, City staff is required to monitor actual demand for potable water in comparison to the supply and demand projections in the 2006 Water Supply and Demand Analysis Report. Staff has compared actual demand for potable water to an annual SCWA supply limit for Petaluma of 4,366 million gallons per year (13,400 acre-feet) and a peak supply limit of 21.8 million gallons per day. In both instances, potable demand is well within available SCWA supply capacity. Tiered water rates, conservation efforts, and the conversion of Rooster Run Golf Course to recycled water have kept annual and peak demands within the available SCWA supply at approximately 3,190 million gallons per year, with an average day maximum month peak demand of 12.42 million gallons, as of December 31, 2012. These water demand figures are within the available SCWA supply of 4,366 million gallons per year and peak supply of 21.8 million gallons per day evaluated in the General Plan 2025 and the 2010 UWMP. The existing water supplies, facilities and infrastructure are sufficient to meet the demands of the project without the need for a substantial expansion or new construction. A standard condition from the department of Water Resources and Conservation requires that the project comply with the City's Water Conservation Ordinance for interior and exterior water usage. Water demand onsite will be limited through efficient irrigation of the landscaping and water efficient fixtures and appliances indoors, consistent with requirements established by the CalGreen Building Code. Therefore, the project impacts to water supplies and infrastructure would be less than significant. Page 75 of 79 October 24, 2013 12)-7s Additionally, a standard condition from the Department of Water Resources and Conservation requires that the project comply with the City's Water Conservation Ordinance for interior and exterior water usage. Thus, no significant impact to water supply is expected. 3.17(e). Less Than Significant Impact: The project is a residential development of the type and density anticipated in the General Plan. The project's contribution to wastewater flows were anticipated in the General Plan and have been considered for operating capacity of the water treatment plant. The increase of 31 dwelling units is well within the flow capacity analyzed as part of the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project will not generate wastewater that exceeds the capacity of the City's existing wastewater treatment plant, when added to existing and projected commitments through General Plan buildout. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impacts related to the adequacy or capacity of wastewater treatment facilities. - - 3.17(f). Less Than Significant Impact: The amount of solid waste expected to be generated by the project is consistent with the service needs anticipated by the Petaluma General Plan and evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The City's franchise solid waste hauling agreement also requires the franchise hauler as part of its contractual obligations to select properly permitted Approved Disposal Location(s) with adequate capacity to serve city service needs. The Project will contribute to the generation of solid waste within the UGB. Solid waste disposal facilities are owned and operated by the Sonoma County Department of Transportation and Public Works. The project's level of contribution is minimal and considered as part of the GP EIR impact analysis. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact to the disposal of solid waste. 3.17(g). Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will adhere to all required regulation regarding the disposal of solid waste. Policy 4-P-21 requires waste reduction in compliance with the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (COIWMP). Construction related waste will be reduced through the development of a construction waste management plan. The project will only generate solid waste typical of residential uses. The City is currently under contract with Petaluma Refuse and Recycling for solid waste disposal and recycling services. This company provides canisters for waste, green (plant waste) materials, and recycling. Solid waste is picked up and trucked to the Sonoma County landfill sites. The project would be supplied with the same solid waste and recycling opportunities through the County's existing waste management system via the City's solid waste service provider. Although the project would generate additional solid waste, it is not expected to exceed landfill capacity and is not expected to result in violations of federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, a less then significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: UTIL-1 In order to ensure that onsite detention is provided to accommodate peak runoff flows, an updated Sheet TM -9 shall be provided that shows the appropriately sized storm drains with consideration of the proposed detention basin. Said plans shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works prior to the issuance of grading permits. Page 76 of 79 —7 October 24, 2013 t 3-- ` 4' 3.18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (CAL. PUB. RES. CODE §15065) A focused or full environmental impact report for a project may be required where the project has a significant effect on the environment in any of the following conditions: " Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant with Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 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 'ts, and the effects of probable future projects)? G)es the project have environmental effects, which will reither ❑ ® ❑ ❑ substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly? Mandatory Findings Discussion: 3.18(a). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The project is located within the UGB and is considered as part of the development plan"set`"forth in the GP and analyzed -in -the EIR. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and goals, policies and programs. With implementation of mitigation measures set forth above in sections 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5 the project's potential impacts would be reduced to levels below significance. As such, the project will not degrade the quality of the environment, reduce habitat, or affect cultural resources. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impacts due to degradation of the environment. 3.18(b). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The project will contribute to the cumulative impacts identified in the City's GP EIR. However, the project contribution is limited and incorporates design features that reduce cumulative impacts to levels below significance. Therefore the project's cumulative impacts will be less than significant. The project has the potential to result in the following cumulative impacts. The Project does not increase the severity of any of the impacts from the levels identified and analyzed in the General Plan, and development of the Project site is proposed at densities consistent with those set forth in the General Plan EIR. Hydrology and Water Quality: The project has the potential to result in cumulatively considerable contributions from stormwater runoff, if the site is not properly protected and erosion control implemented. Mitigation Measures HYDRO -1 through HYDRO -4 above will ensure that the project's potential for cumulative impacts are reduced to levels below significance. Utilities and Services: The project has the potential to contribute runoff to the storm drain system that would result in a cumulatively considerable increase in storm flows if not properly mitigated. Page 77 of 79 October 24, 2013 `3 " 7 7 Measure UTIL-1 above along with the development of the proposed detention basin will ensure that any cumulative impacts associated with utilities are reduced to levels below significance. Cultural/Historic Resources: The project has the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable impact due to the loss of a 1900 era farm home, which could remove a historic resource from a potential historic district. Pursuant to Measure CUL -1 and CUL -2, the subject farmhouse is required to be restored and preserved as part of the subject undertaking. Thus, the potential for cumulative impacts due to the removal of a historic resource from a potential historic district is avoided, as the farmhouse will remain. 3.18(c). Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The project has the potential to result in adverse impacts to humans due to air quality, noise, and hydrology. With those mitigation measures set forth above, the project will have less than significant environmental effect that would directly or indirectly impact human beings onsite or in the project vicinity. Therefore the project will have less than significant impacts due to substantial adverse environmental effects. Page 78 of 79 -7b October 24, 2013 (j rp 4. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: General Plan and Zoning Ordinance General Plan Chapter 1. Land Use, Growth Management, & the Built Environment General Plan Chapter 7. Community Facilities, Services & Education General Plan Chapter 2. Community Design, Character, &Green Building General Plan Chapter 8. Water Resources General Plan Chapter 3. Historic Preservation General Plan Chapter 9. Economic Health & Sustainability General Plan Chapter 4. The Natural Environment General Plan Chapter 10. Health & Safet General Plan Chapter 5. MobilityGeneral Plan Chapter 11. Housing General Plan Chapter 6. Recreation, Music, Parks, & the Arts Implementing Zoning Ordinance/ Maps Other Sources of Information Petaluma UWMP Published geological maps SCWA UWMP General Plan 2025 EIR FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Mas SMART Master Plan BAAQMD CAP BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines Technical Appendices: The following resources were prepared in order to further identify project specific parameters. Copies of these technical documents are incorporated herein by reference are available for review during normal business hours at the City of Petaluma, 11 English Street, in the Community Development Department. A. "Updated Tree Report: 470 and 498 Corona Road," prepared by HortScience, Inc., July 2011. B. "Biological Resources Assessment for Corona Road," prepared by WRA Environmental Consultants, dated June 2009. C. "A Biological Resources memorandum for the proposed Riesling Road Detention Basin," prepared by regarding the detention basin area prepared by WRA Environmental Consultants, dated March 25, 2013. D. "Cultural Resources and Historic Structures Evaluation of Corona Subdivision and 470 and 490 Corona Road," prepared by Archaeological Resource Service, June 2009. E. "Corona Subdivision XP -Storm Evaluation," prepared by WEST Consults Inc., March 5, 2013. F. "Soil Engineering Consultation, and Soil Investigation Report Update: Corona Road Subdivision," prepared by REESE & Associates Consulting Geotechnical Engineers, July 28, 2011 and update memo provided April 9, 2013. G. "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Corona Road," prepared by Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences, LLC., June 4, 2009. H. "Stormwater Control Plan for Corona Road Development," prepared by Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Inc., March 2011. I. "Addendum to Drainage Report - Corona Road," prepared by Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Inc., September 7, 2006. J. "Traffic Analysis for Corona Road," prepared by Dowling Associates, Inc., dated February 25, 2011. Page 79 of 79 October 24, 2013 � 3- 79