HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6.A 08/01/2005CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 6. A.
AGENDA BILL August 1, 2005
Agenda Title:
An Application to Amend the General Plan from Urban Standard to
Urban High, Amend the Zoning Map from Agricultural to PUD,
Approve a PUD Plan and Development Standards, Adopt a Mitigated Meeting Time: ❑ 3:00 PM
Negative Declaration and Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Submittal ® 7:00 PM
of a HOME Application for the constriction a 57 unit senior residential
facility plus one manager's unit. Located at 400 Casa Grande Road,
near the southeast corner of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard
South. A.P. 017-040-047, File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR (Moore/Boyle)
Category (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar X❑ Public Hearing ❑ New Business
❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation
Denartment: Director:Con
tact Person: Phone Number:
Community Mike Moore Phil Boyle, A�oe' 778-4301
Development Director Planner
Cost of Proaosal: N/A Account Number: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A Name of Fund: N/A
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item:
1. Draft Resolution Adopting a General Plan Amendment
2. Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Draft Ordinance Adopting a Zoning Map Amendment, Unit Development Plan, and PUD Development
Standards (This ordinance includes the Conditions of Approval)
4. Draft Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of a HOME Application
5. Staff Report from the June 28, 2005 Planning Commission meeting without attachments
6. Project Location Map and Project Description
7. Initial Study and Mitigation and Monitoring Program
8.Studies: A) Phase I Env. Site Assessment (w/o appendices) by Miller Pacific Engineering Group B)Traffic
Impact Analysis (w/o appendices) by W -Trans C) Geotechnical Investigation (w/o appendices) by Miller
Pacific Engineering Group D) Environmental Noise Study by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (Note: if you
would like a copy of the appendices please contact CDD)
9. PUD Development Standards
10. Plans date stamped July 22, 2005 (City Council members only)
Summary Statement:
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on June 28, 2005. After deliberating and taking
public testimony, the Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval of the PEP Casa Grande
project to the City Council. The proposed project is a 57 unit senior residential facility with one manager's
unit. The 2.33 acre site is located at 400 Casa Grande Road, near the southeast corner of Casa Grande
Road and Ely Boulevard South.
Recommended Citv Council Action/Suggested Motion:
The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council: 1) Approve the General Plan
Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High, 2) Approve the Zoning Map Amendment from
Agricultural to Planned Unit District and the associated PUD Plan and Development Standards, 3) Adopt
the Mitigated Negative Declaration, 4) Adopt Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of a HOME
Application.
Reviewed by Admin. Svcs. Dir: Reviewed by City Attornev: !Fi
v City Manager:
Date: _�11LI() i Date: Date:
Toda�Date: Revision # and Date Revised: lde:
July 20, 2005 # SXC-City Council\Reports\Casa Gmnde PEP
CC.doc
1
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
AUGUST 1, 2005
4 AGENDA REPORT
FOR
PETALUNIA ECUMENICAL PROPERTIES - CASA GRANDE
9
10 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
11
12 The project submitted for review by the applicant, Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP), is for a
13 General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High with a community benefit and
14 affordable housing density bonus and a rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Unit District (PUD).
15 The proposal is to create a 58 unit (57 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom manager urtit) senior
16 residential community. The 2.33 acre site is located at 400 Casa Grande Road, near the
17 southeasterly comer of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South. The facility will be comprised
18 of four clusters of 2 story buildings with total of 45,320 sq. ft., including activity rooms, an exercise
19 room, laundry facilities and a manager's office. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed
20 project on June 28, 2005. After deliberating and taking public testimony, the Commission
21 forwarded a unanimous recommendation of approval of the project to the City Council. The June
22 28`h public hearing can be reviewed on the City of Petaluma's Website at www.cityofpetaluma.net.
23
24
25 2. BACKGROUND:
26
27 The site has been used as farm and/or pasture land as far back as 1958 according to historic aerial
28 photographs. The site is currently used as grazing land and there is a small shed which is used to
29 sell strawberries during certain parts of the year. On June 10, 2004 and February 10, 2005 this
30 project went before the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) for a preliminary
31 review. The committee generally supported the project; however they did express concerns about
32 the distance between some of the units and the parking area, emergency vehicle access and the
33 elevation of Building A facing Casa Grande Road.
34
35 A parcel map (PM 350)was completed in May of this year which divided the 3.16 acre parcel into
36 two lots, one of which is the 2.33 acre project parcel.
37
38 The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on June 14, 2005 to present the project and solicit
39 questions and comments on the proposed development. Invitations to the meeting were sent out to
40 all property owners and residents with 500 feet of the project. The list of addresses was provided by
41 the City of Petaluma.
42
43 The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on June 28, 2005. After deliberating and
44 taking public testimony, the Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval of the PEP -Casa
45 Grande project to the City Council.
46
47
48
49
A
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
PROJECT DESCR/PTioN
The proposal is to create a 58 unit (57 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom manager unit) senior
residential conrrmnity. The 2.33 acre site is located at 400 Casa Grande Road, near the
southeasterly comer of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South. The facility will be comprised
of four clusters of 2 story buildings with total of 45,320 sq. ft., including activity rooms, an exercise
room, laundry facilities and a manager's office. Each unit will be one bedroom and one bath with a
small kitchen, living area and storage area off of the rear deck. The units range in size from 614 to
680 sq. ft. The manager's unit is 895 sq. ft. (See Attachment 6 Project Location Map and Project
Description)
The site plan is designed to be pedestrian oriented with multiple pathways, focal points and
separation from vehicular traffic. Orientation to the creek is incorporated as a major focal point for
community activity. Common areas for the residents include covered and uncovered pathways, the
Village Center (community room), smaller meeting rooms, a bocce court and a community garden.
The architecture of the project clusters units into two-story buildings with exterior covered
balconies and interior front corridors. The shed roofs of the buildings are designed to represent the
historical agricultural architecture of the area. The site landscaping is designed to offer residents,
staff, and guests a pleasant outdoor environment.
Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site will be via Casa Grande Road. Because of the existing
median on Casa Grande Road, access to the site will be limited to right turn in and right turn out.
Vehicles traveling west will be required to make a U -tum from the two-way center left -turn lane to
enter the site. A total of 44 parking spaces or .75 spaces per unit will be provided on the site. No
parking is allowed in front of the project on Casa Grande Road.
The project density is approximately 25 units per acre. To achieve this density, the applicant is
requesting the maximum density for the Urban High designation (20 units/acre). This density is
allowed if the project provides a measurable community benefit. In addition, the project will
receive a 25% affordable housing density bonus.
See Attachment 9, Full size (Council Members Only) and 11x17 Architectural, Civil, and
Conceptual Landscaping Plans.
STAFFANAYLSIS
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Urban Standard. The City of
Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan. The most recent version of the draft Land Use
Map shows the project parcel as High Density Residential (18.1-30du/ac). Because the updated
General Plan has not yet been adopted by the City and may not be adopted prior to approval of this
project, a General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High is required.
State law requires that any decision on a General Plan Amendment must be supported by findings
of fact. These findings are the rationale for malting a decision either to approve or deny a project.
If the City Council chooses to approve the General Plan Amendment specific findings are required.
J
W
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
These findings and an explanation of how the project complies with each are listed in Attachment 1;
Draft Resolution Adopting a General Plan Amendment
The Urban High designation is intended primarily for multi -family dwellings, i.e., for three or more
dwelling units on the same site and in the same or separate buildings. The density range is 10.1 to
15.0 du/ac. Higher densities (up to 20 du/ac) are allowed if 1) a measurable community benefit can
be found, 2) infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density, and
3) where the effects of the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the General
Plan.
The 58 residential units on 233 acres represent a density of 25 units per acre. The "measurable
community benefits" derived from the project are: 1) the creation of an independent living facility
for low-income seniors, 2) the project will provide seniors with facilities for recreation, education,
exercise and community events. If the Planning Commission and City Council concur that the
project provides a overall "measurable community benefit" sufficient to allow a density of 25 du/ac,
then the current proposal complies with the uses and density specified by the General Plan.
ZONING CONSISTENCY
To develop this project as proposed, an amendment to the Zoning Map is required. The applicant is
requesting a rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD designation
is "designed to allow inclusion within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual density, building
intensity, or design characteristics which would not normally be permitted in a single use district or
combination of zoning districts ..."
The applicant is proposing a PUD to create a project which will meet the specific needs of the low
income seniors. Specifically, the PUD will have a parking ratio of less than 1.5 spaces per dwelling
unit which is required for multiple dwellings under standard zoning.
A PUD can be created only after approval by the City Council of a complete unit development plan
showing the internal design of the district, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the
surrounding area. The applicant has submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of
the Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a PUD. If the City Council chooses to approve the PUD
specific findings are required. These findings are listed in Attachment 2 -Draft Ordinance Adopting
a Zoning Map Amendment, Unit Development Plan, and PUD Development Standards. This
ordinance also includes the Conditions of Approval for the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study
of potential environmental impacts was prepared. The potential for the following significant
impacts were identified: Noise. Mitigation measures have been proposed and agreed to by the
applicant that will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. hi addition, there is no
substantial evidence that supports a fair argument that the project, as mitigated, would have a
significant effect on the environment. It is therefore recommended that a Mitigated Negative
Declaration be adopted (See Attachment 2, Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration)
n
u
1
2 TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION:
3
4 A traffic study prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Inc.(W-
5 trans) provides an analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Two intersections were
6 evaluated within the project area, Casa Grande Road/Ely Blvd. and Casa Grande Road/McDowell
7 Blvd.
8
9 Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger
10 developments with multiple uses. The project is anticipated to generate 209 daily trips of which 5 will
11 be during the a.m. and 7 during the p.m. peals hour.
12
13 The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are
14 expected to occur with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels.
15 Under this scenario, all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at
16 LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
17
18 The project plan identifies a single access connection to Casa Grande Road. The access driveway will
19 extend southeast to a circular turn -a -around and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to
20 right turns in and out of Casa Grande Road because of the existing median. Residents and guests
21 exiting the site and wishing to travel west on Casa Grande Road will need to make a U-turn at the
22 Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout. Residents and guests arriving from the east would be
23 required to make a U-turn from the two-way center left -turn lane which is located opposite Casa
24 Grande High School to enter the site. Conflicts between project traffic and traffic from the high
25 school are expected to be minimal because of the low number of trips generated by the project
26 especially during the peals hours.
27
28 The project provides 44 parking spaces, 3 are handicap and 9 are compact or a ratio of 0.75 spaces per
29 unit. The City's PUD development standards allow for more flexible parking requirements than
30 standard zoning. The City of Petaluma does not define parking standards for senior housing
31 complexes. However, the traffic study researched other communities and found that the County of
32 Monterey requires one parking space for every two units plus one guest space for every eight units or
33 0.6 spaces per unit. This project exceeds that parking standard. Other PEP projects that have been
34 approved in the last several years have comparable parking ratios; 200 Douglas St. and 167 Edith St.,
35 have parking ratios of 0.9 and 0.8 spaces/unit respectively.
36
37 A small portion of the trips to the site would be via public transit. The existing route provided by
38 Petaluma Transit on Casa Grande Road adjacent to the project site is expected to be adequate to serve
39 the potential demand. Petaluma Transit stops in the project vicinity on Casa Grande Road at Ely
40 Boulevard and Sartori Drive for eastbound travel and in front of Casa Grande High School for
41 westbound.
42
43 There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to
44 construction vehicles entering and exiting via Casa Grande Road. Construction vehicles will be
45 contained to the site to the extent possible and will not impact the movement of local traffic. The
46 project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and the Police Department to ensure that the project
47 provides adequate access for emergency vehicles. The developer shall also be responsible for a fair
48 share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee as established through City Ordinance.
49
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
The PPBAC reviewed the proposed project and provided specific recommendations and conditions.
These recommendations included bike parking, lighting, benches, drinking fountains, bikeways and
signs. Staff has reviewed these recommendations and forwarded those which are consistent with
the City of Petaluma Bike Plan and feasible as conditions of approval to the P1aTming Commission,
City Council and Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Thus, the project would comply
with the adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation.
The PPBAC has recommended that a bicycle/pedestrian path be constricted along the east side of the
project adjacent to Adobe Creek. Furthermore, a community group ("Friends of Adobe Creek") has
been working to develop paths along both sides of Adobe Creek. A formal and informal path
currently exists along the east side of the creek from Ely Boulevard to Lakeville Hwy. The portion of
Adobe Creek adjacent to this project was dedicated to the City of Petaluma in 1990 when the Fairway
Meadows Subdivision was created. The area is fenced and has no public access at this time. If a path
was constructed from the rear of the project to Ely Boulevard it would provide a convenient
connection for the project residents to Ely Boulevard, the existing path on the east side of Abode
Creels and the Fairway Meadows neighborhood. The path would be owned and maintained by the
City of Petaluma and a gate at the northeast corner of the project would provide access for the
residents. The Planning Commission recommend that a condition be add which requires the applicant
to pay a fair share to the City of Petaluma towards the construction of a future path. This condition
has been added (See Attachment 3 -Approval of a Rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Unit
District (PUD), the Unit Development Plan and the PUD Development Standards)
PROTECT APPROVALS
Following City Council approval, the proposal must receive Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee approval for the site, architectural, and landscaping plans and the Unit Development
Plan and PUD Development Standards.
PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE
No new public comments have been received, since the last Planning Commission hearing and as of
July 20, 2005
3. ALTERNATIVES:
a. The City Council may accept the recommendation from the Planning Commission to
approve the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
Zoning Map Amendment, the PUD Development Map and Development Standards and
the authorization of a HOME Application.
b. The City Council may deny the request for the General Plan Amendment, the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, the Zoning Map Amendment, the PUD Development Map and
Development Standards and the authorization of a HOME Application.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
The HOME Program is a low -moderate income rental new construction program administered by
the California State Dept. of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The proposed
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
application will be submitted by the City of Petaluma for funding to be utilized by Petaluma
Ecumenical Properties (PEP) for their most recent proposed development, Casa Grande Senior
Apartments. This proposed development will provide 57 new units for the community's expanding
senior population. The application is due August 15, 2005 and the funding notification is scheduled
for October 2005. Staff is recommending that the City apply to the HOME program for an amount
not -to -exceed $4.5 million to be utilized by PEP to finance a portion of the development.
HOME funds are allocated to the City from HCD as a grant; the City then loans the funds to a
nonprofit developer, in this case PEP. Loan documents are then recorded for the amount of the
allocation. The terns of the loans are generally 30-50 year deferred at 3% interest. The loans are
secured by a promissory note and deed of trust, with a rental restriction agreement insuring long-
term affordability. The City receives an administrative fee for administering the grant.
The following Low -Mod Housing Fund commitments have been made to PEP for the Casa Grande
Senior Apartments project:
FY 2004-2005 $1,057,500
FY 2005-2006 565,000
FY 2006-2007 (proposed) 450,000
Approximately $891,200 has been disbursed for site acquisition and predevelopment costs to date.
HCD requires a resolution by the City Council authorizing the submittal of such an application. A
draft resolution is attached to this report as Attachment 4- Draft Resolution Authorizing the
Submittal of a HOME Application.
This project is subject to any applicable City Special Development Fees. The project is subject to
the cost recovery fee system; therefore, the applicant is required to pay all costs associated with
processing the application. To date the City has collected $20,450. Approximately 61 hours of
total staff time at a cost of approximately $2,800 has been expended to date. If this project is
ultimately approved, additional staff time will be required to guide the application through the
SPARC and building permit process.
5. CONCLUSION:
The Planning Commission and staff found that the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoning
Map Amendment, PUD Map and Development Standards for the PEP — Casa Grande Project would
not create any new significant environmental impacts and that the proposed project is consistent
with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission
has forwarded a recommendation of approval with conditions to the City Council.
6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
N/A
7
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
7. RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending the
General Plan from Urban Standard to Urban High, Amend the Zoning Map from Agricultural to
Planned Unit District (PUD), Approve a Unit Development Plan and Development Standards,
Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of an
Application to the California State Department of Housing and Community Development for
funding under the HOME Investment Partnerships Program in an amount not -to -exceed $4.5
million, the execution of a standard agreement if selected for such funding and any amendments
thereto; and any related documents necessary to participate in the Home Investment Partnership
Program for the construction a 58 unit senior residential facility.
LI
SACC -City CoundhReports\Casa Grande PGP CC.doc
I ATTACHMENT
1)
3
4 DRAFT
5 RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
6
7 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
8 FOR THE
9 PETALUMA ECUMENICAL PROPERTIES -CASA GRANDE PROJECT
10 AT
11 400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
12
13 APN 017-040-047
14 CITY FILE #05 -GPA -0041 -CR
15
16 WHEREAS, an application was filed by Petaluma Ecumenical Properties to develop a senior
17 residential facility at 400 Casa Grande Road, which occupies approximately 2.3 acres. The
18 application includes a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Urban Standard to
19 Urban High and
20
21 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request on June 28, 2005; and
22
23 WHEREAS, all reports and comments from the Planning Commission were forwarded to the City
24 Council; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this amendment on
27 August 1, 2005, and considered all written and verbal communications before rendering its
28 decision; and
29
30 WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the project were considered and proper action
31 has been taken by the City Council in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and
32 local environmental guidelines.
33
34 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council herby approves the
35 requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to change the designations as outlined
36 above based upon the following findings:
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is deemed to be in the public interest because it
provides an independent living facility for low-income seniors as well as facilities for senior
recreation, education, exercise and community events. Furthermore, the project is along a
public transit route and in reasonable proximity to shopping and city services.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the
General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. The proposed General
Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High will increase the density of the
project parcel however the project is within the density limits of the Urban High General
Plan designation. The amendment is consistent with goals and policies of the City's
Housing Element to provide housing opportunities for the low income seniors. Furthermore,
the proposed General Plan Amendment will be consistent with the currently proposed
I General Plan Update which designates this site as High Density Residential (18.1-30.0
2 du/ac)
3. The potential impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment have been assessed and
have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. The
project plans were referred to fire, police, public services and engineering staff for review
and comment, and the staff recommendations have been incorporated into drag conditions
of project approval to ensure that the project will not be detrimental to public health, safety
or welfare.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been processed in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts was prepared (See
Attachment F, Initial Study). The Initial Study identifies mitigation measures regarding
noise that would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Based upon the Initial
Study, a determination was made that no significant environmental impacts would result. A
copy of this notice was published in the Arcus Courier and provided to residents and
occupants within 500 feet of the site, in compliance with CEQA requirements.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment to Urban High with a higher density (10 to 30 units
per acre) is allowed "where measurable community benefit is to be derived; where
infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density; where
superior design ensures an attractive, comfortable and healthy living environment; and
where the effects of the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the
General Plan." The 58 residential units on 2.33 acres represent a density of 25 units per
acre. The "measurable community benefits" derived from the project are: 1) the creation of
an independent living facility for low-income seniors, and 2) the project will provide seniors
with facilities for recreation, education, exercise and community events. The initial study
demonstrates that the project will have adequate public services and infrastructure to serve
the increased density. The design of the project, including it's architecture site plan and
landscaping plan, have all been reviewed by staff and comply with the City approved
SPARC Guidelines. The project has also received two preliminary reviews from SPARC
and requires formal SPARC review and approval prior to building permit issuance.
36
10
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
ATTACHMENT 2
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PETALUMA
ECUMENICAL PROPERTIES -CASA GRANDE PROJECT AT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
APN 017-040-047, CITY FILE #05 -GPA -0041 -CR
WHEREAS, an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts was prepared and the results of the
study indicated that the proposed Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) — Casa Grande project, as
mitigated, will not cause any significant adverse environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma held a public hearing on June 28,
2005, on the subject application, heard testimony, and concluded that the findings and conditions as
amended were adequate and recommended to the City Council approval of the proposed
development; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the PEP—Casa Grande Proposal on August 1, 2005, and
considered all written and verbal communications concerning potential environmental impacts
resulting from the project before rendering a decision;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves a Mitigated Negative
Declaration subject to the following Findings and Mitigation Measures:
1. An Initial Study was prepared and demonstrated that there is no substantial evidence that
supports a fair argument that the project, as conditioned, would have a significant effect on
the environment. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was drafted to avoid or reduce to a level
of insignificance, potential noise impacts generated by the proposed project.
2. The project does not have the potential to have a significant adverse impact on wildlife
resources as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either individually or cumulatively
and is not exempt from Fish and Game filing fees.
3. The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List compiled by the
State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code.
4. The Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study and considered public comments
before making a recommendation on the project.
5. That a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure compliance with the
adopted mitigation measures.
6. The record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public review at the
City of Petaluma Planning Division, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California and
the City of Petaluma's website at www.cityofpetaluma,net.
Mitigation Measures
All mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study for the PEP -Casa Grande Proposal, are
herein incorporated.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A
REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL TO PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT
AND APPROVING THE UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR THE
PETALUMA ECUMENICAL PROPERTIES -CASA GRANDE PROJECT
AT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
APN 017-040-047 CITY FILE #05 -GPA -0041 -CR
WHEREAS, by action taken on June 28, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the current
PEP -Casa Grande Project and forwarded a recommendation with conditions to the City Council to
approve the rezone the project parcel from a zoning designation of Agricultural to Planned Unit
District and approve the PUD Development Plan and the PUD Standards to allow the PEP -Casa
Grande Project to be developed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) have been satisfied through the preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of
Resolution No. N.C.S., approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration to address the specific
impacts of the PEP -Casa Grande Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed project on June 28, 2005 and,
after giving notice of said hearing, in the manner, for the period, and in the form required by
Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as amended; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed PEP -Casa Grande Project PUD
Development Plan and PUD Development Standards;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the Unit Development
Plan and PUD Development Standards subject to the following Findings, Conditions, and
Mitigation Measures:
FINDINGS
1. That the plan clearly results in a more desirable use of land and a better physical
environment than would be possible under a single zoning district or combination of zoning
districts. The applicant is proposing a PUD to create a compact project which will meet the
specific needs of low income seniors. Specifically, the PUD will have a parking ratio of less
than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit which is required for multiple dwellings.
2. That any P.U.D. District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one (1)
or more thoroughfares, and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any additional
traffic generated by the development. This PUD is proposed on a site which has a suitable
relationship to Casa Grande Road, and that said thoroughfare is adequate to carry any
additional traffic generated by the development, as demonstrate by the traffic impact study
submitted for the project.
IA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
3. That the plan for the proposed development presents a unified and organized arrangement of
buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby
properties and that adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure
compatibility. The architecture of the proposed project is consistent throughout in terns of
bulk, height, and massing. The site plan is designed to be compatible with the adjacent
properties by providing adequate setbacks to existing neighbors, Casa Grande Road and
Adobe Creek. Landscaping has been proposed which will buffer the project from adjacent
properties to the north, south and Casa Grande Road. Landscaped common areas for
outdoor activities are provided throughout the project.
4. That the natural and scenic qualifies of the site are protected, with adequate available public
and private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan. The project site is relatively
flat and contains no natural or scenic qualities.
5. The Unit Development Plan, including the Development Standards, will result inappropriate
and compatible uses in the district.
6. The development of the subject property in the manner proposed by the applicant, and as
conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the
City, and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the
City of Petaluma, and with the Petaluma General Plan.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (The conditions in italics have been added as ree_uested bv_ the
Plannine Commission)
From the Plannine Division (778-4301)
1. Prior to issuance of building permit the applicant shall provide documentation showing that
they have paid a fair share to the Cit)) of Petaluma towards the construction of a nntlti-use path
along Adobe Creek from the rear of the project parcel to Ely Boulevard.
2. Before 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 and the Mitigation Measures as notes.
3. The plans submitted for building permit review shall be in substantial compliance with the
Civil, Architectural and Landscape Plans date stamped June 14, 2005.
4. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the PEP Casa Grande project are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of project
approval.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a water conservation plan
for review and approval by the City of Petaluma Department of Water Resources. The said
plan shall identify Best Management Practices for water conservation that would result in a
reduction of water consumption by at least 40%.
6. The landscape plan, irrigation plan and grading plan shall comply with,the City's Landscape
Water Efficiency Standards. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project, each of
these plans and all supporting documents shall be submitted to the City for review and
13
I approval. The Landscape Water Efficiency Standards shall apply to all common area, open
2 space, park, and subdivision perimeter landscaping, as well as single-family front yard
3 landscaping.
7. Upon approval by the City Council, the applicant shall pay the $35.00 Notice of
Determination fee to the Planning Division. The check shall be made payable to the County
Clerk. Planning staff will file the Notice of Deternnination with the County Clerk's office
within five (5) days of receiving Council approval. The State Department of Fish and Game
has found that a de minimis determination is not appropriate, and that an environmental filing
fee (as required under Fish and Game Code Section 711.4d) must be paid to the Sonoma
County Cleric on or before the filing of the Notice of Determination (for fee aniount, contact
them at 944-5500).
8. Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee shall review the site plan design, building
design, PUD Development Standards, colors and materials, landscaping, and lighting.
9. Prior to SPARC review, an exterior lighting plan shall be submitted. Said plan shall include a
detail of the types of all fixtures to be installed for review and approval. All lighting shall be
hooded and project downward, providing a soft "wash" of light. Flood lights are inappropriate,
only low profile light standards and/or wall mounted lights shall be allowed. No lighting on the
site shall create a direct glare into cyclist/pedestrian eyes.
10. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be halted
temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for evaluation of the artifacts and
to recommend future action. The local Native American community shall also be notified and
consulted in the event any archaeological remains are uncovered.
11. All noise generating construction activities shall be limited to daytime, weekday (non -holiday
hours) 8:00am to 5pm and 9am to 5pm Saturdays, as stated in the mitigation measures.
12. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion shall be properly muffled and
maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use.
13. Construction maintenance, storage, and staging areas for construction equipment shall avoid
proximity to residential areas to the maximum extent practicable. Stationary construction
equipment, such as compressors, mixers, etc., shall be placed away from residential areas
and/or provided with acoustical shielding. Quiet construction equipment shall be used when
possible.
14. Construction and demolition debris shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible in order
to minimize impacts on the landfill.
Citv of Petaluma Bicv_ cle Plan and Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicvcle Advisorv_ Committee
Conditions of ADDroval
15. Bike Parking: Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised to show four exterior
covered bicycle racks at each building.
16. Benches: Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised to show additional benches in
the garden area, outside Building D and at the northern corner of the site.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
17. Pesticide / Herbicide Use: Under no circumstances shall any pesticide/herbicide be applied in
areas used by pedestrians/bicyclist anywhere in this project or the surrounding areas without
appropriate signs warning of the use of chemicals, a policy currently employed by the Music,
Recreation, and Parks Department. This project shall utilize Best Management Practices
regarding pesticide/lierbicide use and fully commit to Integrated Pest Management techniques
for the protection of bicyclist and pedestrians.
From the Eneineerine Division (778-4301)(See Attachment K, Memo from Craie Snauldine)
Engineering has reviewed the subject application and has the following conditions of approval.
Conditions shall be addressed at the time of building permit application unless otherwise indicated.
18. Overhead utilities along the project frontage shall be placed underground prior to the issuance
of a certificate of occupancy.
19. Streetlights shall be installed as required by City standards.
20. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated across the project frontage prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
21. Grading shall conform to the geotechnical investigation report.
22. Erosion control, water quality and best management practices shall be employed and the
necessary documentation filed as required by the responsible agencies.
23. The storm drain outfall shall be constructed per the Sonoma County Water Agency criteria
and with the required permits.
24. Hydrologic and Hydraulic calculations shall be reviewed and approved by the Sonoma County
Water Agency.
From the Fire Marshal's Office, Michael Ginn (778-4389)1
25. All residential structures are required to be fully sprinldered (including attics) as mitigation for
fire hose reach beyond 150' from emergency vehicle access location. This will necessitate the
addition of check valves and FDCs to service mains feeding the residential units.
26. Post Indicator Values will be required to be installed on laterals for fire service mains serving
the residential units.
27. Provide fire hydrant at the driveway entrance to service the new Fire Department Connections.
28. Verification of (and final approval of) ambulance access to the courtyard on the north side of
Building C-1 and the turning radius of same will require final approval the Fire Marshal.
Also, no obstructions (e.g. benches, trees, shrubs) will be permitted within 5' of sphere of
influence of "three point" turnaround area. The road base and surface covering of the
sidewalk used for ambulance access and turnaround must support 14,500 lb GVW. Civil
plans must reflect this condition when submitted for permit.
11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
29. Provide fire lane signs (or stripes on pavement) to the entrance of the ambulance access to the
courtyard from the parking lot.
30. Provide fireflow calculations verifying a minimum of 1500 gpm at 20 psi for fire hydrants at
driveway entrance and terminus of cul-de-sac that serves Building D.
31. The point of entry behind Building D for manual firefighting to the creek area must be
accessible from the cul-de-sac without having to go around the building to access it. Any
modifications to Building D or the access gate along the creek must be reviewed and approved
by the Fire Marshal.
32. Provide a Knox box for fire department access. The Knox box shall contain keys or access
codes to building/s. Provide key with tag indicating address and suite number for Knox box.
Multiple boxes may be required for access to fire sprinkler controls for each building. Verify
total number with the Fire Marshal's office before ordering.
33. Post address numbers on or near main entry door. Numbers are to be a minimum of four
inches high with contrasting background, and must be visible from the street.
34. An address locator board/map will be required near entrance or at a location approved by the
Fire Marshal. Consultation with the Fire Marshal's office for design specifications and size
will be required.
From the Department of Water Resources and Conservation. Imad Baivasi (778-4304)
35. The Regional Water Quality Control Board shall approve the storm drain outlet into Adobe
Creek.
36. Specify City Standard Detail 870 for a Typical Combination Water Service. A Double
Detector Check valve, as per Standard Detail 880, should protect fire line.
37. Water service lines greater that 2 inches must be provided with a 2 -inch loop. Provide
necessary pipe size for domestic demand and fire flow requirements..
38. Any unused existing utilities shall be properly abandoned as per city Standards.
39. On-site utilities shall be privately owned and maintained. The storm drain outfall structure
shall also be privately maintained.
From the Police Department (778-4370)
40. Plans submitted for building permit shall have outside numbering of each unit illuminated and
visible from the driveway.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS
PROGRAM; AND IF SELECTED, THE EXECUTION OF A STANDARD AGREEMENT,
ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO; AND OF ANY RELATED DOCUMENTS NECESSARY
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM
WHEREAS:
A. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (the "Department') is
authorized to allocate HOME Investment Partnerships Program ("HOME") funds made
available from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"). HOME
funds are to be used for the purpose set forth in Title II of the Cranston -Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act of 1990, in federal implementing regulations set forth in Title 24 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, part 92, and Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations
commencing with Section 8200.
B. On June 1, 2005 the Department issued a 2005 Notice of Funding Availability announcing
the availability of funds under the HOME program (the "NOFA").
C. In response to the 2005 NOFA, the City of Petaluma, a municipal corporation, (the
"Applicant") wishes to apply to the Department for, and receive an allocation of, HOME
funds.
IT IS NOW THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT:
1. In response to the 2005 NOFA, the Applicant shall submit an application to the
Department to participate in the HOME program and for an allocation of funds not to exceed
$4.5 million for a Rental New Construction project consisting of a total of 57 senior
apartments, located in Petaluma, CA.
2. If the application for funding is approved, the Applicant hereby agrees to use the
HOME funds for eligible activities in the manner presented in its application as approved by
the Department and in accordance with regulations cited above. The Applicant may also
execute a standard agreement, any and all other documents necessary or required by the
Department or HUD for participation in the HOME program (collectively, the required
documents).
3. The Applicant authorizes the City Manager, or the Manager's designee, to execute in
the name of the Applicant, the required documents.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
ATTACHMENT 5
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Coianaaaio,DenelopnzentDepartment, PlanniugDinision, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 778-4301 Fat (707) 778-4498 E-mail: planning&ipetaluuia.ca. its
DATE: June 28, 2005
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
AGENDA ITEM NO. III
SUBJECT: A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM THE EXISTING LAND
USE OF URBAN STANDARD TO URBAN HIGH WITH A COMMUNITY
BENEFIT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS AND A
REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL TO A PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT (PUD)
TO CONSTRUCT A 58 UNIT SENIOR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to:
a. Approve the General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High
b. Approve the Zoning Map Amendment from Agricultural to Planned Unit District and
the associated Unit Development Plan and Development Standards.
c. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project: Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) Casa Grande
Project Planner: Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
Project Applicant: Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP)
3920 Cypress Dr. Ste. B
Petaluma CA 94954
Property Owner: Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP)
3920 Cypress Dr. Ste. B
Petaluma CA 94954
Property Size: 2.3 acres
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Site Characteristics: The site is vacant with a gentle slope of approximately 1% to the southeast.
The site is bound on the north by a vacant parcel and a small 0.38 acre site that is developed with a
single-family residence and accessory structure. To the west is Casa Grande Road and Casa Grande
High School athletic fields. A 4.2 -acre site with a single-family residence is to the south. Adobe
Creek and Fairway Meadows Subdivision are to the east. Finally, Adobe Creek Golf & Country
Club Subdivision is to the northeast of the project site.
Existing Use: Agricultural purposes, including grazing activities and the selling of strawberries
Proposed Use: A 58 unit (57 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom manager unit) senior
residential community consisting of four clusters of 2 story buildings with total of 45,320 sq. ft.,
including activity rooms, an exercise room, laundry facilities and manager's a office.
Current General Plan Land Use: Urban Standard (2.1-5.0 du/ac)
Proposed General Plan Land Use: Urban High (10-15 du/ac) - The Urban High designation is
intended primarily for multi -family dwellings, i.e., for three or more dwelling units on the same site
and in the same or separate buildings. Higher densities (up to 20 du/ac) are allowed if 1) a
measurable community benefit can be found, 2) infrastructure, services, and facilities are available
to serve the increased density, and 3) where the effects of the increased density will be compatible
with the major goals of the General Plan.
Current Zoning: Agricultural
Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit District which is designed to allow inclusion within its boundaries
a mixture of uses or unusual density, building intensity, or design characteristics which would not
normally be permitted in a single use district.
Subsequent Actions Required:
• City Council Review and Approval
■ Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) Review and Approval
• Improvements Plans
• Building Permits
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project submitted for review by the applicant is for a General Plan Amendment from Urban
Standard to Urban High with a community benefit and affordable housing density bonus and a
rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Unit District (PUD).
The proposal is to create a 58 unit (57 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom manager unit) senior
residential community. The 2.33 acre site is located at 400 Casa Grande Road, near the
southeasterly corner of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South. The facility will be comprised
of four clusters of 2 story buildings with total of 45,320 sq. ft., including activity rooms, an exercise
room, laundry facilities and a manager's office. Each unit will be one bedroom and one bath with a
small kitchen, living area and storage area off of the rear deck. The units range in size from 614 to
680 sq. ft. The manager's unit is 895 sq. ft. (See Attaclunent E Project Location Map and Project
Description)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
The site plan is designed to be pedestrian oriented with multiple pathways, focal points and
separation from vehicular traffic. Orientation to the creek is incorporated as a major focal point for
community activity. Common areas for the residents include covered and uncovered pathways, the
Village Center (community room), smaller meeting rooms, a bocce court and a community garden.
The architecture of the project clusters units into two-story buildings with exterior covered
balconies and interior front corridors. The shed roofs of the buildings are designed to represent the
historical agricultural architecture of the area. The site landscaping is designed to offer residents,
staff, and guests a pleasant outdoor environment.
Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site will be via Casa Grande Road. Because of the existing
median on Casa Grande Road, access to the site will be limited to right tum in and right turn out.
Vehicles traveling west will be required to make a U-turn from the two-way center left -turn lane to
enter the site. A total of 44 parking spaces or .75 spaces per unit will be provided on the site. No
parking is allowed in front of the project on Casa Grande Road.
The project density is approximately 25 units per acre. To achieve this density, the applicant is
requesting the maximum density for the Urban High designation (20 units/acre). This density is
allowed if the project provides a measurable community benefit. In addition, the project will
receive a 25% affordable housing density bonus.
See Attachment L, Full size (Planning Commission Members Only) and 11x17 Architectural, Civil,
and Conceptual Landscaping Plans.
11ff- S7 S@ ' ll1r i
The site has been used as farm and/or pasture land as far back as 1958 according to historic aerial
photographs. The site is currently used as grazing land and there is a small shed which is used to
sell strawberries during certain parts of the year. On June 10, 2004 and February 10, 2005 this
project went before the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) for a preliminary
review. The committee generally supported the project; however they did express concerns about
the distance between some of the units and the parking area, emergency vehicle access and the
elevation of Building A facing Casa Grande Road (See Attachment I for minutes of the June 10,
2004 hearing and a video of the February 10, 2005 hearing can be viewed on the City's Website
cityofpetaluma.net)
A parcel map (PM 350)was completed in May of this year which divided the 3.16 acre parcel into
two lots, one of which is the 2.33 acre project parcel.
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on June 14, 2005 to present the project and solicit
questions and comments on the proposed development. Invitations to the meeting were sent out to
all property owners and residents with 500 feet of the project. The list of addresses was provided by
the City of Petaluma.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
STAFF ANALYSIS
General Plan Consistency:
The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Urban Standard. The City of
Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan. The most recent version of the draft Land Use
Map shows the project parcel as High Density Residential (18.1-30du/ac). Because the updated
General Plan has not yet been adopted by the City and may not be adopted prior to approval of this
project, a General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High is required.
State law requires that any decision on a General Plan Amendment must be supported by findings
of fact. These findings are the rationale for making a decision either to approve or deny a project.
If the Planning Commission chooses to forward a recommendation to the City Council specific
findings are required. These findings and an explanation of how the project complies with each are
listed in Attachment A, Draft Findings for Approval — General Plan Amendment.
The Urban High designation is intended primarily for multi -family dwellings, i.e., for three or more
dwelling units on the same site and in the same or separate buildings. The density range is 10.1 to
15.0 du/ac. Higher densities (up to 20 du/ac) are allowed if 1) a measurable community benefit can
be found, 2) infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density, and
3) where the effects of the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the General
Plan.
The 58 residential units on 2.33 acres represent a density of 25 units per acre. The "measurable
community benefits" derived from the project are: 1) the creation of an independent living facility
for low-income seniors, 2) the project will provide seniors with facilities for recreation, education,
exercise and community events. If the Planning Commission and City Council concur that the
project provides a overall "measurable community benefit" sufficient to allow a density of 25 du/ac,
then the current proposal complies with the uses and density specified by the General Plan.
The General Plan policies that may apply specifically to this project are summarized below:
Community Character Element
Policy 10 and 11—The City shall encourage public and private landscaping along or in all major
streets, including street trees. The applicant has proposed a landscaping plan which includes
landscaping and street trees along Casa Grande Road
Policy 14.1 -Street improvements shall incorporate, where applicable, safe pedestrian and
bicycle access and related facilities. The project was referred to the Petaluma Pedestrian and
Bicycle Advisory Committee. The committee provided conditions of approval and recommendations.
Conditions of approval which are codified will be required of the development. The
recommendations from the coimnittee will be forward to the Planning Commission, City Comicil and
SPARC for consideration.
C�I
1 Policy 14.2 -New development shall include pedestrian and bicycle circulation within and
2 through the site to connect existing and planned City-wide pedestrian and/or bicycle networks.
3 The project includes private pathways throughout the development which connect to the existing
4 sidewalk on Casa Grande Road The issue of a public path connecting the project to Ely Boulevard is
5 discussed in the Traffic/Circulation section of the report.
6
7 Policy 27 -The City shall require the provisions of privately owned open space in residential
8 developments of more than 15 units where made necessary by project density or design, or
9 lack or proximity to public parks and open space. The nearest parks and open space areas to the
10 project site are Del Oro Park and Crinella Mini Park both are approximately half mile from the
11 project site. The project proposes public open space areas in terms of walking paths, court yards, a
12 community garden and bocci court. In addition each unit has a private courtyard or balcony. The
13 site plan shows approximately one third of project as private open space.
14
15
16 Land Use and Growth Management Element
17
18 Policy 28 -The City shall support residential development only in those areas where adequate
19 City facilities are available or will be provided with development. Conditions have been applied
20 to ensure that adequate City services will be provided at the appropriate stages of the project
21 entitlement and building permit review process.
22
23
24 Open Space, Conservation, and Energy Element
25
26 Policy 25 -Developers shall provide adequate drainage and erosion control during
27 construction. The developer will be required to conform to City and State regulations by providing
28 an erosion control and storm water pollution prevention plan, which shall be adhered to throughout
29 project construction.
30
31
32 Parks, Recreation, Schools, and Child Care
33
34 Policy 1 -The City shall require all new residential development to dedicate land or pay a park
35 fee for public parks. The applicant will be required to pay a Park Land Acquisition and
36 Development Fee prior to occupancy of the residential units. These fees provide for acquisition,
37 development and improvement of neighborhood and community park and recreation facilities.
38
39
40 Housing
41
42 Policy 1.1 and 1.2 -Promote residential development within the Urban Growth Boundary and
43 encourage the development of housing on underutilized land. The proposed project is within the
44 UGB and is considered vacant and underutilized land.
45
46 Policy 2.1, 4.3 and 6.4 - Encourage a mix of housing design types for low and moderate -
47 income households and the elderly. The proposed project provides housing for low income
48 seniors.
49
50
aa.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Transportation
Policy 1—On city streets where Level of Service (LOS) is currently at "C" or better, LOS shall
not deteriorate below level "C". The traffic report submitted by the applicant concludes that the
LOS for all of the study area intersections will not deteriorate below level "C".
Policy 10—New development shall be required to pay a pro -rata share of needed traffic
improvements. The project is conditioned to pay the standard traffic impact fees required of all
proj ects.
Community Health and Safety
Policy 27—Require sound buffers (particularly landscaped buffers), open space, or other
mitigation measures between residential areas and areas producing higher noise levels, such
as freeways, commercial sites, and industrial developments to achieve the sound level
reduction necessary to produce noise compatible land uses. The consulting firm of Illingworth
and Rodkin, Inc. conducted an envirornnental noise assessment to evaluate the compatibility of the
development with respect to the environmental noise levels at the project site and evaluate noise
impacts upon sensitive receptors in the area. The majority of the noise is generated from Casa Grande
Road. The report concluded that with proper construction techniques the residences will not be
exposed to noise levels that exceed the city standards.
Zonine Ordinance Consistenev:
To develop this project as proposed, an amendment to the Zoning Map is required. The applicant is
requesting a rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD designation
is "designed to allow inclusion within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual density, building
intensity, or design characteristics which would not normally be permitted in a single use district or
combination of zoning districts ..."
The applicant is proposing a PUD to create a project which will meet the specific needs of the low
income seniors. Specifically, the PUD will have a parking ratio of less than 1.5 spaces per dwelling
unit which is required for multiple dwellings under standard zoning.
A PUD can be created only after approval by the City Council of a complete unit development plan
showing the internal design of the district, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the
surrounding area. The applicant has submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of
the Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a PUD. If the Planning Commission chooses to forward a
recommendation to the City Council specific findings are required. These findings and an
explanation of how the project complies with each are listed in Attachment B, Draft Findings for
Approval — Zoning Map Amendment, Proposed Development Standards, and PUD Map.
a3
1 Traffic/Circulation:
1)
3 A traffic study prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, hic.(W-
4 trans) provides an analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Two intersections were
5 evaluated within the project area, Casa Grande Road/Ely Blvd. and Casa Grande Road/McDowell
6 Blvd.
7
8 Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger
9 developments with multiple uses. The project is anticipated to generate 209 daily trips of which 5 will
10 be dining the a.m. and 7 during the p.m. peak hour.
11
12 The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are
13 expected to occur with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels.
14 Under this scenario, all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at
15 LOS C or better dining the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
16
17 The project plan identifies a single access connection to Casa Grande Road. The access driveway will
18 extend southeast to a circular tum -a -around and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to
19 right turns in and out of Casa Grande Road because of the existing median. Residents and guests
20 exiting the site and wishing to travel west on Casa Grande Road will need to make a U-turn at the
21 Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout. Residents and guests arriving from the east would be
22 required to make a U-turn from the two-way center left -turn lane which is located opposite Casa
23 Grande High School to enter the site. Conflicts between project traffic and traffic from the high
24 school are expected to be minimal because of the low number of trips generated by the project
25 especially during the peals hours.
26
27 The project provides 44 parking spaces, 3 are handicap and 9 are compact or a ratio of 0.75 spaces per
28 unit. The City's PUD development standards allow for more flexible parking requirements than
29 standard zoning. The City of Petaluma does not define parking standards for senior housing
30 complexes. However, the traffic study researched other communities and found that the County of
31 Monterey requires one parking space for every two units plus one guest space for every eight units or
32 0.6 spaces per unit. This project exceeds that parking standard. Other PEP projects that have been
33 approved in the last several years have comparable parking ratios; 200 Douglas St. and 167 Edith St.,
34 have parking ratios of 0.9 and 0.8 spaces/unit respectively.
35
36 A small portion of the trips to the site would be via public transit. The existing route provided by
37 Petaluma Transit on Casa Grande Road adjacent to the project site is expected to be adequate to serve
38 the potential demand. Petaluma Transit stops in the project vicinity on Casa Grande Road at Ely
39 Boulevard and Sartori Drive for eastbound travel and in front of Casa Grande High School for
40 westbound.
41
42 There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to
43 construction vehicles entering and exiting via Casa Grande Road. Construction vehicles will be
44 contained to the site to the extent possible and will not impact the movement of local traffic. The
45 project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and the Police Department to ensure that the project
46 provides adequate access for emergency vehicles. The developer shall also be responsible for a fair
47 share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee as established through City Ordinance.
48
49 In March 2000, the City Council adopted the City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan and Map as an
50 amendment to the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The Plan states that the City shall route
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
development plans to the Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PPBAC), allowing
consideration of bicycle/pedestrian issues. The PPBAC reviewed the proposed project and provided
specific recommendations and conditions (See Attachment 1 Memorandum from PPBAC). These
recommendations included bike parking, lighting, benches, drinking fountains, bikeways and signs.
Staff has reviewed these recommendations and forwarded those which are consistent with the City
of Petaluma Bike Plan and feasible as conditions of approval to the Planning Commission, City
Council and Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Thus, the project would comply with
the adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation.
The PPBAC has reconmlended that a bicycle/pedestrian path be constricted along the east side of the
project adjacent to Adobe Creek. Furthermore, a community group ("Friends of Adobe Creek") has
been working to develop paths along both sides of Adobe Creek. A formal and informal path
currently exists along the east side of the creek from Ely Boulevard to Lakeville Hwy. The portion of
Adobe Creek adjacent to this project was dedicated to the City of Petaluma in 1990 when the Fairway
Meadows Subdivision was created. The area is fenced and has no public access at this time. If a path
was constricted from the rear of the project to Ely Boulevard it would provide a convenient
connection for the project residents to Ely Boulevard, the existing path on the east side of Abode
Creek and the Fairway Meadows neighborhood. The path would be owned and maintained by the
City of Petaluma and a gate at the northeast corner of the project would provide access for the
residents. PEP is a nonprofit organization which relies of government funding and has limited
resources for offsite improvements. Staff recognizes the value of pathways along creeks and supports
there development wherever feasible. Staff has not conditioned the project to construct a path at this
time per the PPBAC recommendations but instead provides the following options for the Planning
Commission to consider:
1. Condition the project to construct a multi -use path built to City Standards from the rear of the
project along Adobe Creek to Ely Boulevard. This path will be owned and maintained by the
City and will perhaps eventually be connected to a larger pathway system along Adobe Creek.
2. Condition the project to pay a fair share to the City of Petaluma towards the construction of a
future path.
3. Do not condition the project to construct a path.
4. Defer the decision to SPARC.
PPBAC recommendations added as conditions of approval:
Bike Parking
• Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised to show four exterior covered bicycle
racks at each building.
Benches
• Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised to show additional benches in the
garden area, outside Building D and at the northern corner of the site.
Pesticide/ Herbicide Use
• Under no circumstances shall any pesticide/herbicide be applied in areas used by
pedestrians/bicyclist anywhere in this project or the surrounding areas without appropriate
signs warning of the use of chemicals, a policy currently employed by the Music,
Recreation, and Parks Department. This project shall utilize Best Management Practices
regarding pesticide/herbicide use and fully commit to Integrated Pest Management
techniques for the protection of bicyclist and pedestrians.
ct5
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
t8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Glare -Free Lighting
• A condition shall be added that glare free lighting facing downward for pedestrians and
bicyclist throughout the project.
PPBAC recommendations that have been ineoroorated into the project by the applicant:
Public Transit Accommodations
• The traffic study provided by the applicant states that the existing public transit service is
adequate.
Class II Bike Lane
• The existing bicycle facilities fronting the project along Casa Grande Road will not change.
PPBAC recommendations not added as conditions of approval:
Interior Bike Parking:
• Staff does not feel it is practical to require this type of project to install interior bike parking.
The required exterior covered bike panting should be adequate.
Through Travel
• There is no specific proposal for abridge over Adobe Creek at this time therefore; itis not
feasible to apply a condition which would prohibit any permanent structure near the south
eastern portion of the project.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing was published in
the Argus Courier on June 8, 2005 and sent to all residents and property owners within 500 feet of
the project site. Since notification of the public hearing, no written communication has been
received.
As previously mentioned, the applicant held a neighborhood meeting to discuss the project on June
14, 2005.
IMPACT FEES
The project will be subject to all applicable special development fees. For a current list of these
fees please contact the Community Development Department.
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the requirements of the California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study
of potential environmental impacts was prepared. The potential for the following significant
impacts were identified: Noise. Mitigation measures have been proposed and agreed to by the
applicant that will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. In addition, there is no
substantial evidence that supports a fair argument that the project, as mitigated, would have a
significant effect on the environment. It is therefore recommended that a Mitigated Negative
Declaration be adopted (See Attaclmzent C, Draft Findings for Approval — Mitigated Negative
Declaration). A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared. (See Attachment F, Initial
Study and Mitigation Monitoring Program)
a�
Powered By GeaSmart.net
Project Location Map
PEP - Casa Grande
City of Petaluma, California
ATTACHMENT 6
AGIS Division O
UN
City Limit
❑
Parcels
Floadplain
F\1
•e
x
M
Flaodway
Minor Waterways
AGIS Division O
UN
R.C.E. 49302
STEVEN J. LAFRANCHI & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS -- LAND SURVEYORS
PETALUMA MARINA BUSINESS CENTER
775 BAYWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 312, PETALUMA, CA 94954
TEL 707-762-3122 FAX 707-762-3239
SITE DATA
Site Address:
A.P. No.
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Existing Land Use:
PROJECT NARRATIVE
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
A SENIOR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
(Planned Unit District)
400 Casa Grande Road
017-040-047 (portion)
Agricultural
Planned Unit District (PUD)
Urban Diversified
Proposed Land Use: Urban High with Community Benefit (20 du/ac)
Affordable Housing Density Bonus (25%)
25 dwelling units per acres
Acreage: 2.33 acres (101,495 S.F.)
P.L.S. 6368
The project being submitted for review is for a rezoning from Agricultural to a Planned
Unit District (PUD) and a General Plan Amendment from the existing land use of Urban
Diversified to Urban High with a community benefit and affordable housing density
bonus.
The project has been previously reviewed as a preliminary submittal by SPARC (04 -
PRE -0298). The project has been resubmitted for another Preliminary SPARC review,
which is being scheduled as of the date of this submittal. An application for a Tentative
Parcel Map (04 -TMP -0718 -CR) has been submitted to the City of Petaluma and is
presently under review. The intent of that submittal is that the Tentative Parcel Map will
be approved and the Parcel Map filed thus creating the subject lot prior to the conditional
approval of this application. The future 2.33 -acre site is located at the southeasterly
comer of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard. This lot will be created through an
existing minor land division procedure, which is presently being processed at the City of
Petaluma.
The following information is based on the comments that have been received by City of
Petaluma staff and SPARC members in conjunction with previous submittal(s) and
meetings.
02641 PUDPN.doe - I -
aq
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The site is bounded to the north by a vacant parcel (the designated remainder from the
above mentioned Parcel Map) and a small 0.38 acres site that is developed with a single-
family residence and accessory structures, Casa Grande Road to the west, a 4.2 -acre site
with a single-family residence to the south and Adobe Creek to the east. The Adobe
Creek Golf and County Club Subdivision Unit No. 1 is located northerly of the site. The
Fairway Meadows Subdivision was developed from Parcel 1, P.M. No. 141 and lies
easterly of the site across Adobe Creek. As part of that subdivision Parcel "A" was
dedicated to the City of Petaluma and encompasses a large area on both sides of Adobe
Creek between the subject project and the homes constructed in the Fairway Meadows
Subdivision. Casa Grande High School athletic fields are located on the opposite side of
Casa Grande Road adjacent to the site.
The site is vacant with a gentle slope of approximately I% to the southeasterly corner of
the property. The land has been used for agricultural purposes that included grazing
activities and the growing of strawberries.
Concept Statement: To create a residential senior community that provides places and
spaces that support and celebrate active senior living.
Site Plan
Design
g� Pedestrian orientation and movement is provided with multiple pathways, focal
points and separation from vehicular traffic. From the parking area, pedestrians
are able to walk a short distance to covered walkways that lead to the units.
Orientation to the creek is incorporated as a major focal point for community
activity. The placement of the turn -around and its treatment, provide a setting
that meets the requirements of the fire department and serves as a public plaza for
the residents. The Village Center enhances the feel of a plaza by framing the
turn -around and completing the are of Building C. The Village Center acts as a
gateway to the creek, providing vistas and pedestrian access through the building.
g� Building configurations are orchestrated and placed in an organized pattern that
that provides spatial variety, views and visual interest.
Architecture
Design
�g The building concept clusters units in a two-story hybrid scheme that combines
features of conventional exterior, single -loaded balcony and interior, double -
loaded corridor plans. The intersection of the "L shaped plan and the curvilinear
plan, in Buildings A and B, is defined by a. central day -lit courtyard. As a focal
point, its thirty-foot diameter defines an outdoor gathering space for the residents
it serves, thereby adding to the sense of neighborhood within the community.
The shed roof form borrows from the agricultural vernacular of the region.
Buildings provide covered exterior balconies at the second floor to enhance the
02641PUMA)c
20
connectivity to other portions of the community. Overhangs are extended to five
feet and are supported by bracing elements, providing shade and visual interest to
the roof - lines. Private patios and balconies are integrated and recessed into the
building to provide weather protection and privacy for the residents. The private
balconies project slightly from the face of each building to provide residents
additional views, day lighting and articulation to the elevations. Storage units are
provided at each private balcony.
z.� The exterior siding is composed of horizontal plank siding and plain face panels.
The plank siding is used to establish a horizontal base to the building form that
transitions to an upper wainscot of paneling. Panel siding wraps the ends of each
building and defines the circulation walls. This two-tiered approach provides
added scale, detail and opportunities for a color change.
g Circulation: All stairways are scissor configurations with at least one intermediate
landing for ease of use. Covered exterior balconies and two elevators access
second floor units. Unit entry doors are recessed for enhanced identity and color
change opportunity.
The Village Center Building, while accommodating a series of indoor activities,
provides a strong orientation to the outdoors. The linear plan creates a varied
frontage along the creek, culminating at the main community room that opens to
its own semi -circular patio that is punctuated with an outdoor fireplace.
Construction:
Curvilinear walls will be constructed as segmented walls (approximately 8 foot
lengths).
-� The James Hardie Company has reviewed the project and confirmed that their
plank siding will accommodate the segmented radius walls proposed.
Contractor estimates have been prepared to assure the feasibility of the proposed
design.
Landscaping
Design
g The site landscape is designed to offer residents, staff, and guests a sense of
orientation within the complex while reinforcing the architectural order of the
project. Design emphasis has been placed on providing a strong landscape identity
to the various areas of the development. A variety of native and ornamental plant
materials will provide seasonal changes in foliage color, bloom and fragrance.
Plant material has been utilized to offer a sense of separation and protection
between living areas and the public areas (walkways, road, and parking areas)
without fully screening these areas from view. Adequate visibility for residents
and guests is provided throughout the site.
The site landscape is organized to provide the following:
a simple streetscape condition at Casa Grande Road
a well defined vehicular entry and parking area
a vertical hedgerow element at the south property line
resident's garden at the Village Center
social and recreation area at the Village Center
02641PUDPN.doc -3 -
31
riparian plantings along creek frontage
a wooded shade garden to the north side of the property
a thematic garden area at the core of the residential area
a No lawn is proposed for the project, and all planted areas will be automatically
irrigated via spray, drip, or bubbler heads. Irrigation circuits will be designed
according to solar exposure and plant material in a given area will be selected for
similarity of water requirements. Trailing groundcovers will be used in areas
where significant leaf -drop by trees is anticipated.
While social opportunities occur throughout the project, larger social gatherings
and recreational opportunities are provided for in the area of the Village Center. A
terrace space containing an outdoor fireplace ties the main hall to a bocce court
located adjacent to the creek. The resident's garden area is situated off the
southeast comer of the Village Center multi-purpose room. The provision of these
amenities will sponsor activity and encourage interaction between residents.
Two types of fencing are proposed for the project. The creek frontage is bound by
a painted open wire fence that is bracketed to 6 by 6 wood posts. This fence is not
aligned entirely along the property line, but stays tight to the edge of proposed
walls and pavement, thereby enlarging the riparian planting zone on the outboard
side of the fence -line. This fence has two gate locations; one to satisfy firefighting
requirements, and another to allow access for disabled to the creek. The second
type of fence is a residential -quality wood privacy fence and is aligned along the
north property line.
Access and Circulation
Vehicle
The proposed project will have vehicular access from Casa Grande Road. The point of
access is approximately 460 feet from the intersection of Casa Grande Road and Ely
Boulevard. The portion of Casa Grande Road where the proposed driveway entrance will
be located has a 15 -foot wide median that separates northbound and southbound traffic.
Based on this existing condition, project ingress and egress will be limited to right tum in
and right tum out.
Internal vehicular access has been designed to allow for both the everyday use by the
residents and for emergency vehicles. A 48 -foot radius cul de sac/plaza per City of
Petaluma design criteria has been incorporated into the project layout to allow the Fire
Department's ladder truck to turnaround on the site.
The site has also been designed to allow an ambulance to access the courtyard on the
northerly side of Building C-1. The courtyard configuration has sufficient area and
clearances to allow the ambulance to make a three-point turnaround movement for
exiting the area.
Michael Ginn has reviewed the internal emergency vehicle circulation design at meetings
during project development.
A Traffic Impact Study was prepared by W -Trans and has been submitted as a part of this
application.
02641 PUDPN.doc -4-
3A
4-
3A
Pedestrian
Public pedestrian access facilities presently exist on Casa Grande Road along the frontage
of the property. An existing 6 -foot wide sidewalk extends southerly from the site down
Casa Grande Road to Lakeville Highway and northerly to Ely Boulevard continuing in an
easterly direction to Frates Road.
All onsite pedestrian access will be private and for the benefit of residents and guests.
One point of access to the existing public sidewalk on Casa Grande Road is being
proposed between the driveway and Building "A". Additional access to public lands that
are located along the easterly side of the site between Abode Creek are also being
proposed. One point of entry located behind Building "D" will be provided as requested
by Michael Ginn to aid firefighters and other emergency personnel to access this area.
Steps will be required because of the grade differential between the site and the public
Iand thus creating an unusable disabled access. A second disabled accessible point of
entry is proposed at the northeasterly corner of the site just off the bocce ball court. Both
access points will be gated and locked.
The site design has been developed to use the available land for the benefit of the
residents of the senior community. Because of the special needs and challenges of this
population security becomes a primary concern. For this reason public access through
the property is not being proposed.
The site pedestrian access has been designed to be in compliance with applicable disabled
access codes.
Bicycle
Existing Class 1I (on -street) bicycle lanes are located on Casa Grande Road. The 1999
City of Petaluma Matrix of Proposed Bikeways shows that a Class I (off-street)
bicycle/pedestrian path is proposed along Abobe Creek from Lakeville Highway to
Adobe Road. A path on the easterly side of Adobe Creek adjacent to the property has
been constructed. There presently is not a path on the westerly side of Adobe Creek
along the frontage of the project. The application as submitted is not proposing any
improvements at this time to create a path or portion thereof. Petaluma Ecumenical
Properties (PEP) is aware of the goals in place to create off-street bicycle/pedestrian
access and connectivity to surrounding neighborhoods, retail areas and transit. They also
see this as an amenity for the senior population. PEP is committed to work with the City
of Petaluma and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee in developing an overall plan for
the area.
Parking
No on -street parking is presently allowed or proposed on Casa Grande Road.
Off-street parking for the project has been determined using a ratio of US stalls per
dwelling unit. This ratio has been used in past PEP projects and has traditionally been
more than adequate for the needs of the residents and guests. 44 parking spaces (3
02641 PUDPN.doc -5-
3)3
5-
3)3
Handicap 24 Standard 12 Compact) are being proposed for the project. This total
exceeds the parking demand total (38 spaces) that is shown in the Traffic Impact Study
prepared by W -Trans.
The parking lot has been designed in compliance with City of Petaluma Site Plan and
Architectural Review Procedure and Guidelines. See the Site Plan prepared by
Archumana for the parking layout.
Sanitary Server
The project will connect to the existing 10" public sanitary sewer system located in Casa
Grande Road with the construction of a manhole. The entire on-site sanitary sewer
system will be private and be maintained by PEP. See the Preliminary Utility Plan
prepare by Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Inc. (SJLA) for proposed locations.
Stara Drain and Drainage
There is no public storm drain system located on Casa Grade Road near the project. The
closest public storm drain is on Ely Boulevard. The proposed project design requires that
the buildings be constructed at the same elevation due to second story connections
between buildings and disabled accessibility concerns at ground level. Because of these
design constraints changes in elevation within the site are minimal. This creates the need
for a dense network of drainage structures between the buildings to collect anticipated
surface runoff from the 10 -year and I00 -year storm events.
The parking lot and cul de sac/pedestrian plaza also provide challenges in addressing
surface runoff. The cul de sac serves a dual purpose for the project. It facilitates required
turning movements for private, commercial and emergency vehicles that enter the site. It
is also designed as a plaza that can be utilized for events and gatherings for the residents.
A handicap parking space is also proposed within this area. The disabled accessibility
design criteria requires that the grades be uniform and relatively flat. In order to mitigate
the surface flows within this area a trench drain is proposed to be constructed around that
portion of the cul de sac that can not drain to a drainage structure within a landscape area.
The parking lot area is design to drain to a "bio-swale" located along the southerly line of
the project. The "bio-swale" is designed to filter the pollutants that accumulate on the
parking lot and are flushed away during storm events before entering the closed storm
drain system. A series of storm structures are located within the "bio-swale" to collect
the surface flow once it has been filtered. The final design of this system -will dictate the
number of drainage structures that will be required to both filter the pollutants and collect
the anticipated surface flows from the storm events.
All surface runoff collected on site will be directed through a private storm drain system
that will outlet in Adobe Creek. The proposed design will require special attention to an
environmentally sensitive ecosystem. Not only will construction of the outlet be a
concern but also the mitigation of potential pollutants that could flow into Adobe Creek.
Agricultural activities that presently exist on the site can be very detrimental to creek
02641PUDPN.doe - 6 -
34—
environments. The goal of this project is to create a more environmentally friendly
symbiotic relationship with the Abode Creek watershed.
The Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) maintains Adobe Creek. The SCWA has
specific design guidelines for outlets into creeks under their jurisdiction. It is also
anticipated that other jurisdictional review will be required. The Department of Fish &
Game and the Army Corp of Engineers may require specific permits to allow
construction within Adobe Creek. It is our experience that these permits are associated
with construction and not entitlement approvals.
As previously stated a "bio-swale" will be designed to mitigate pollutants washed from
the parking lot into storm drain system. The project as proposed will not allow sediment
to enter into the Adobe Creek watershed. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required by the San Francisco Regional
Water Quality Control Board for the development of this site to address these issues. The
final design and construction documents will implement the required system necessary to
mitigate the pollution and sediment issues.
Adobe Creek can flood. Based on a field survey preformed by SJLA and information in
the Flood Rate Insurance Maps (FRUvo the 100 -year flood boundary line is located
entirely off the project site. The flood boundary line is shown on the Sheets TM -3, TM -4
and TM -5 prepared by SJLA.
Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plans along with Preliminary Utility Plans have been
prepared by SJLA to conceptually demonstrate the civil design for the grading and storm
drain system. Final construction documents and drainage reports will formalize the
design.
Rater
The project will connect to the existing 12" public water system located in Casa Grande
Road. One connection is proposed. This connection would be sized to allow for a
domestic, irrigation and fire protection system to service the project. The proposed water
connection system is shown on the Preliminary Utility Plan prepare by SJLA.
Domestic
One domestic water meter is proposed. From that meter a main private line will be
extended into the site with individual lines servicing each building. The size of the meter
and the interior water lines need to be determined.
Fire Protection
During the design development process we met with Michael Ginn to conceptually
address the fire protection needs for the project. A double detector check valve system is
proposed to be constructed per City of Petaluma Standards.
Each residential building will have a dedicated fire protection water line per fire code
requirements.
02B+1PUnPN.duc -7-
3,15
7-
35
The non-residential building (Building "D") will also have a dedicated line but will
require a fire department connection and a check valve as per fire code requirements. An
onsite fire hydrant is also being required in conjunction with the fire protection system
for Building "D" and for the overall protection of the site. An existing fire hydrant is
located in front of the project.
It should be noted that this is a conceptual layout and the final design is subject to
change.
Irrigation
The potential irrigation system is limited to show the location of the meter and the
backflow preventer. A final design will be completed as part of the construction
documents.
Public Utilities
Existing overhead utilities are located along the easterly side of Casa Grande Road. Thi:
development does not propose to underground these existing utilities. All on-site public
utilities shall be placed underground. The City of Petaluma requires that the transformer
be place underground for residential projects. It should also be noted that at the time of
construction documents all materials used for joint utilities should be compliance with
local ordinances.
Development Standards and Design Guidelines
Draft Development Standards and Design Guidelines have been prepared as required
under Section 19A-202 (9). See attached.
Supplemental and Supporting Reports
A number of reports can be required for the PUD Tentative Map application submittal.
The following is a list of reports that have been prepared:
Traffic Impact Study— W -Trans
Preliminary Title Report — Old Republic Title Company
Geotechnical Investigative Report — Miller Pacific Engineering Group, Inc.
Environmental Noise Assessment — Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
Phase 1 Environmental — Miller Pacific Engineering Group, Inc.
Accompanying this submittal package are additional supporting documents, exhibits and
reports that address project objectives in greater detail. These include the following:
PUD Development Standards
PUD Checklist
Development Schedule
02641PUDPN.duc
��j
ATTACHMENT 7
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Initial Study
of Environmental Significance
■ Introduction: This Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq) and the CEQA Guidelines. Additional information incorporated by
reference herein includes: the project application, environmental information questionnaire, environmental review
data sheet, project referrals, staff report, General Plan, EIR and Technical Appendices, and other applicable
planning documents (i.e., Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan, Petaluma River Watershed Master
Drainage Plan, specific plans, etc.) on file at the City of Petaluma Planning Division.
Project Name: Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) Casa Grande File No: 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Site Address: 400 Casa Grande Road APN: 017-040-047
Posting Date: June 8, 2005 Comments Due: June 28, 2005
Lead Agency Contact: City of Petaluma, Phil Boyle, Associate Planner Phone: (707) 7784301
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Project Description:
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP)
3920 Cypress Dr. Ste. B
Petaluma CA 94954
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP)
3920 Cypress Dr. Ste. B
Petaluma CA 94954
The project submitted for review by the applicant is for a General Plan Amendment from the existing land use of
Urban Standard to Urban High with a community benefit and affordable housing density bonus and a rezoning from
Agricultural to a Planned Unit District (PUD).
The proposal is to create a 58 unit (57 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom managers unit) senior residential
community that provides places and spaces that support and celebrate active senior living. The 2.33 acre site is
located at 400 Casa Grande Road, near the southeasterly corner of Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South.
The facility will be comprised of four clusters of 2 story buildings with total of 45,320 sq. ft., including activity
rooms, an exercise room, laundry facilities and managers offices. Each unit will be one bedroom and one bath with
a small kitchen, living area and storage area off of the rear deck. The units range in size from 614 to 680 sq. ft.
The site plan is designed to be pedestrian oriented with multiple pathways, focal points and separation from
vehicular traffic. Orientation to the creek is incorporated as a major focal point for community activity. Common
areas for the residents include covered and uncovered pathways, the Village Center (community room), smaller
meeting rooms, a bocce court and community garden.
3�
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
The architecture of the project clusters units into two-story buildings with exterior covered balconies and interior
front corridors. The shed roofs of the buildings are designed to fit into the historical agricultural vernacular of the
area.
The site landscape is designed to offer residents, staff, and guests a sense of orientation within the complex while
reinforcing the architectural order of the project. Design emphasis has been placed on providing strong landscape
identity to the various areas of the development.
Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site will be via Casa Grande Road. Because of the existing median on Casa
Grande Road, access to the site will be limited to right tum in and right tum out. A total of 44 parking spaces or .75
stalls per unit will be provided on the site. No parking is allowed in front of the project on Casa Grande Road.
The project density is approximately 25 units per acre. To achieve this density, the applicant is requesting the
maximum density (20 units/acre) within the Urban High designation because the project provides a measurable
community benefit as well as a 25% affordable housing density bonus.
Environmental Setting:
The site is vacant with a gentle slope of approximately 1% to the southeasterly corner of the property. The land has
been used for agricultural purposes that included grazing activities and the growing of strawberries. The site is
bound to the north by a vacant parcel and a small 0.38 acre site that is developed with a single-family residence and
accessory structure. To the west is Casa Grande Road and Casa Grande High School athletic fields. A 4.2 -acre site
with a single-family residence is to the south. Adobe Creek and Fairway Meadows Subdivision are to the east.
Finally, Adobe Creek Golf & Country Club Subdivision is to the northeast of the project site.
Responsible/Trustee Agencies:
The project requires a recommendation from the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council of a
General Plan Amendment, and Rezoning. Following approval from the City Council the project must be reviewed
and approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Lastly, the project will be subject to building
permit review and approval by the Community Development Department
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" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
1. Land Use & Planning 7. Noise
2. Population, Employment & S. Visual Quality & Aesthetics
Housing
3. Geology & Soils 9. Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
4. Air 10. Transportation/Traffic
5. Hydrology & Water Quality 11. Public Services
6. Biological Resources 12. Recreation
13. Utilities Infrastructure
14. Mineral Resources
15. Cultural Resources
16. Agricultural Resources
17. Mandatory Findings of
Significance
M
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
■ Determination
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
X not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find 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 initigated" 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 only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment because all
potentially significant effects a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier 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 mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project nothing further is required.
A Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration will be prepared, distributed and posted for the public
comment period of June 8. 2005 through June 28, 2005.
Prepared by: Phil Ass ' to Planner _
Si re
Da
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
■ Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No impact" answers that are adequately supported
by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question: A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not
apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A no impact
answer should be explained where it is based in project -specific factors as well as general standards, i.e.,
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis.
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including: off-site as well as on-site
cumulative, project -level indirect, direct, construction, and operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or
less than significant. "Potentially Significant impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less
Than Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how
they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier
Analyses" may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration pursuant to Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
Mo
Casa Grande PEP, 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
■ Environmental Analysis
Land Use and Plannina. Would the project:
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, specific 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?
Potentially I Less than I Less Than I Na
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact w/Mitigation Impact
Measures
X
M
ki
Discussion: The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Urban Standard. The City of
Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan and the most recent draft Land Use Map shows the project
parcel as High Density Residential (18-30 du/ac). Because the updated General Plan has not been adopted by the City
and may not be adopted prior to approval of this project, a General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard (2.1-5
du/ac) to Urban High (10-15 du/ac) is being requested by the applicant. The Urban High designation is intended
primarily for multi -family dwellings, i.e., for three or more dwelling units on the same site and in the same or
separate buildings. The density range is 10.1 to 15.0 du/ac. Higher densities (up to 20 du/ac) are allowed if 1) a
measurable community benefit can be found, 2) infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the
increased density, and 3) where the effects of the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the
General Plan.
The 58 residential units on 2.33 acres represent a density of 25 units per acre. The "measurable community
benefits" derived from the project are: 1) the creation of an independent living facility for low-income seniors, 2)
the enhancement of the city by providing a quality product with a unified and organized arrangement of buildings
and a facilities which is appropriate in relation to the adjacent and nearby properties and 3) provide private open
space as well as landscaped spaces for the residents. If the Planning Commission and City Council concur that the
project provides a "measurable community benefit' sufficient to allow a density of 25 du/ac, then the current
proposal complies with the uses and density specified by the General Plan.
The project is within the Agricultural Zoning District, which is intended to preserve blocks of agricultural land (both
prime and non -prime) in agricultural or open space use, which either have a definite public value as open space or
which are intended for eventual development in other uses, pending proper timing for the economical provision of
utilities, major streets, and other facilities, so that compact orderly development will occur. The project is classified
as Urban and Built Up Land on the Sonoma County Important Farmland 2000 Map. The proposed project includes a
request for a rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD is "designed to allow inclusion
within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual density, building intensity, or design characteristics which would
not normally be permitted in a single use district or combination of zoning districts ..." Development in this zone
is allowable only after the approval by the City Council of a complete Unit Development Plan showing the internal
design of the District, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the surrounding area." The application has
submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of the Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a PUD.
The Planning Commission and the City Council are required to make specific findings that are outlined in the staff
report prior to approving the PUD.
A-1
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less T7tan
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
There is no existing habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan that exists for this area of the
city. Therefore, there is no impact.
Mitigation Measures/Monitorina: Not applicable.
2. Population, Emplovment and Housincl. Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, X
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
C. Displace substantial numbers of people X
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Discussion: The proposed project is to create a 58 unit senior residential community at a density of 25 du/ac. The
adjacent parcels to the northeast and southwest are very rural in nature and are development at a density range of 1
unit per 0.5 acres and 1 unit per 4 acres. The Fairway Meadows Subdivision across Adobe Creek from the project site
is developed at a density of f4 units per acre. The proposed project will result in an increase in density of
approximately 5 times from the existing General Plan designation. However, the most recent land use designation in
the Draft 2005-2025 General Plan Update for the project parcel as well as the parcel to the northeast is High Density
Residential (18 to 30 du/ac) and the parcels to the southwest are proposed to be Medium Density (8 to 18 du/ac). If
the City Council makes the findings and approves the General Plan Amendment, the project will be consistent with
the new General Plan designation. The development will not displace any housing or people. In fact, the project
would increase the housing supply.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
E
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd, file No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
D
Significant
Significant
Significant
h
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
3. Geoloav and Soils. Would the project:
0
npact
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X
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
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X
topsoil?
C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
I8 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
X
M
X
ii
X
e. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic X
substructures?
f. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
X
g. Change in topography or ground surface relief X
features?
It. The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
i. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, X
either on or off site?
j. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion, which
may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
X
X
k. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards X
such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure or similar hazards?
f3
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Discussion: A geotechnical report by Miller Pacific Engineering Group was provided as part of application packet.
The report concluded that the site is suitable for development provided the recommendations and criteria presented in
the report are incorporated into the design and carried out through construction. The primary geotechnical concerns
relative to site development are near -surface expansive soil and appropriate foundation design to resist strong seismic
ground shafting. Design recommendations for these and other geotechnical issues are provided in the Conclusion and
Discussion Section of the report.
The project is an in -fill development. The project will not result in unstable earth or geologic conditions. The soil will
be compacted prior to project construction. Additional buildings and associated paved parking and circulation areas
will cover the soil. The project will not result in the destruction or covering of any unique geologic features or expose
people to any geologic hazards not typically associated with this region. The project site is relatively flat with no
significant land features or characteristics. The minor grading required to permit development of the project has the
potential to cause slight water erosion if construction is carried out during the rainy season (October 15th through
April 15th). The grading also has the potential to cause minor wind erosion if the soil conditions are dry.
Landscaping will be installed at the site and will help to mitigate erosion. The Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee (SPARC) will review the landscape plans for the location, size, type and species of plant material to be
installed. The applicant will be required to submit foundation and structural designs for the proposed structures to
demonstrate compliance with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Additionally, the review of grading,
public improvements and erosion control plans by the Engineering Division will mitigate any impacts to soil
erosion that may result from the proposed construction.
The application of the requirements contained in the City of Petaluma Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance and
requirements listed below will reduce any potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from erosion and/or
runoff to a level of less than significant.
L Prior to issuance of a grading permit, building permit or approval of an improvement plan or Final Map, the
Applicant shall provide a Soils Investigation and Geotechnical Report prepared by a registered professional
civil engineer for review and approval of the City Engineer and Chief Building Official in accordance with
the Subdivision Ordinance and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance. The soils report shall address site
specific soil conditions (i.e. highly expansive soils) and include recommendations for: site preparation and
grading; foundation and soil engineering design; pavement design, utilities, roads, bridges and structures.
2. Final project improvement and grading plans shall be prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
(P.E.), and accepted by City staff prior to Final Map approval. The plans shall be prepared in compliance
with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance. A
comprehensive erosion control plan shall be prepared, paying special attention to prevention of increased
discharge. The control plan shall include measures such as: a) restricting grading to the non -rainy season;
b) protecting storm drainage outlets from erosion and siltations; c) use of silt fencing, and straw wattles to
retain sediment on the project site or Best Management Practices (BMPs) as recommended by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Required improvements shall be reflected on plans submitted in
conjunction with the project's improvement drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Director and the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval. Prior to City acceptance, all public
improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the approved Public
Improvement Plans, construction permits and project mitigation measures/conditions of approval. All
public and/or private improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the
approved Improvement Plans, prior to City acceptance.
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. O5 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
3. All construction activifies shall comply with the Uniform Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e.,
reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing parapets, etc.). Foundation and structural design for
buildings shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as well as state and local
laws/ordinances. Construction plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Building Division prior to
the issuance of a building permit. All work shall be subject to inspection by the Building Division and must
conform to all applicable code requirements and approved improvement plans prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Mitigation Measures/MonitorinLr: Not applicable.
4. Air. Where available, the significance of criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable 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 non -attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
tlu'esholds for ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
13
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X
number of people?
X
X
X
Discussion: Temporary short-term increases in exhaust emissions and dust would result from the use of construction
equipment. This will not be of a level that would result in a significant impact to ambient air quality. The project will
not result in objectionable odors or alter air movement, moisture, or change in climate. The application of the City's
standard mitigation measures (such as watering graded surfaces to reduce dust and shutting down vehicles when not
in use), these impacts would be short-term.
Per City requirement, the applicant shall incorporate the following Best Management Practices into the construction
and improvement plans and shall clearly indicate these provisions in the specifications. The construction contractor
shall incorporate these measures into the required Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive dust and
exhaust emissions during construction.
Exposed soils shall be watered a minimum of twice daily during construction. The frequency of watering
shall be increased if wind speeds exceed 15 mph.
q5
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
The construction site shall provide a gravel pad area consisting of an impermeable liner and drain rock at the
construction entrance to clean mud and debris from construction vehicles prior to entering the public
roadways. Street surfaces in the vicinity of the project shall be routinely swept and cleaned of mud and dust
carried onto the street by construction vehicles.
During excavation activities, haul trucks used to transport soil shall utilize tarps or other similar covering
devices to reduce dust emissions.
• Post -construction re -vegetation, repaving or soil stabilization of exposed soils shall be completed in a timely
manner according to the approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and verified by City inspectors prior to
acceptance of improvements or issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Applicant shall designate a person with authority to require increased watering to monitor the dust and
erosion control program and provide name and phone number to the City of Petaluma prior to issuance of
grading permits.
Miduation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable
5. Hvdroloav and Water Qualitv. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
e. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
I. 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?
X
X
V4
KI
X
10 462
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
g. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
X
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of X
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
Discussion:
X
The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or substantially contaminate the groundwater.
The proposed development of the site will require the average fill over the entire site of about 3 feet. The maximum
amount of fill (f 6 feet) will be at the southern corner of the project.
The closest public storm drain is on Ely Boulevard. The proposed project requires that the buildings be constructed at
the same elevation due to second story connections between buildings and disabled accessibility concerns at ground
level. Because of these design constraints, changes in elevation within the site are minimal. This creates the need for
a dense network of drainage structures between the buildings to collect anticipated surface runoff from the 10 -year
and 100 -year storm events.
The project may change existing drainage patterns. However, these will not be significant alterations as all
hydrologic, hydraulic, and storm drain system design shall be subject to review and approval by the Sonoma
County Water Agency (SCWA) and the City Engineer. No lot -to -lot drainage shall be permitted, unless private
storm drain easements are created to collect rear yard surface water runoff. Surface runoff shall be addressed
within each individual lot, and then conveyed to an appropriate storm drain system. The project site is not within a
floodway or floodplain. The project would not result in alteration to the course of floodwaters, affect ground water,
surface waters, reduce the public water supply, or expose people to water related hazards. Prior to construction, the
geotechnical engineer will review the final plans and specifications.
The parking lot area is design to drain to a "bio-swale" located along the south property line. The "bio -Swale" is
designed to filter the pollutants that accumulate on the parking lot and are flushed away during storm events before
entering the closed storm drain system. In accordance with requirements set by the State Water Resources Control
Board, the applicant would prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) per the latest state
requirements to be implemented throughout project construction and operation. The Applicant shall complete and
submit an Notice of Intent (NOI) and appropriate filing fee to the SWCB. 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 the Engineering Division prior to approval of improvement plans, final map or issuance of grading or
building 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 and include the following as appropriate:
Provision for vegetated streamside buffer areas separating formal landscape and developed areas from creek
channels and drainage ways. The stream buffer zone shall be landscaped with native plant species to filter
and absorb sediment and chemical constituents and provide a zone for rainfall infiltration next to the creek
channel.
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less nian
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
All drainage improvement plans shall include installation of permanent signs (concrete stamps or
equivalent) at each storm drain inlet. The sign at each inlet shall read "No Dumping, Flores To The
Petaluma River" or equivalent, and shall be installed at the time of construction and verified prior to
acceptance of public improvements or issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the sediment and/or pollutant entering
directly or indirectly into the storm drain system or ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following
provisions into the construction plans and specifications, to be verified by the Community Development
Department, prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
The applicant shall designate on the improvement plans construction staging areas and areas for the storage
of any hazardous materials (i.e., motor oil, fuels, paints, etc.) to be used during construction. All
construction staging areas shall be located away from any drainage areas to prevent runoff from
construction areas from entering into the drainage system. Areas designated for storage of hazardous
materials shall include proper containment features to prevent contamination from entering drainage areas
in the event of a spill or leak.
No debris, soil, sand, cement, or washing thereof, or other construction related materials or wastes, soil or
petroleum products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system. All
discarded material including washings and any accidental spills shall be removed and disposed of at an
approved disposal site. The applicant shall designate appropriate disposal methods and/or facilities on the
construction plans or in the specifications.
Pesticides and fertilizers shall not be applied to public landscape areas during the rainy season (October
1st -April 15th). The applicant shall utilize Best Management Practices regarding pesticidelherbicide use
and fully commit to Integrated Pest Management techniques. The applicant shall be required, when
pesticide/herbicide use occurs, to post appropriate signs warning pedestrians.
The Applicant shall be subject to the payment of the City's Storm Drainage Impact Fee. Drainage Impact Fees shall
be calculated at the time of Final Map approval and a fair share portion shall be paid for each residential unit prior
to final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The project may change existing drainage patterns and result in additional runoff that would occur by creating new
non -pervious surfaces (new paving and new structures). To minimize these impacts the following standard
requirements apply:
1. This developer shall pay the storm drainage impact fee and provide on-site improvements to address
the incremental impact that the new development will have on citywide drainage. The Community
Development Department shall calculate the project's appropriate storm water drainage fee and shall
insure that the fee is collected as provided for in the City's Resolution.
2. The applicant shall submit a detailed grading and drainage plan as a part of the improvement drawings
for review and approval by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The drainage plans shall
include supporting calculations of storm drain. Surface runoff shall be addressed and conveyed to an
appropriate stone drain system. All public improvements shall be subject to inspections by City staff
for compliance with the approved Public Improvement plans, construction permits, project mitigation
measures and conditions of approval, prior to City acceptance.
12
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. O5 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
3. All site drainage improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the minimum
requirements of Sonoma County Water Agency Design Criteria and shall be subject to review and
approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency and the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building
permit. All public improvements shall be subject to inspections by City staff for compliance with the
approved Public Improvement plans, construction permits and project mitigation measures/conditions
of approval, prior to City acceptance.
4. Required mitigations and conditions of approval shall be reflected on plans submitted in conjunction
with the project's improvement drawings, landscaping, drainage, storm water pollution prevention, and
erosion control plans, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Department and the City Engineer, and as appropriate by the Sonoma County Water Agency. The
applicant shall obtain appropriate approvals from all necessary regulatory and trustee agencies prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
The subject property is not located in within a 100 -year flood hazard area and, therefore, will not place structures
within a 100 -year flood hazard area. The project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss
associated with flooding. The project will not expose people to the risk of flooding or tsunami. The project includes
on site storm water detention; therefore, the impact to the capacity to the existing storm drainage system would be
less than significant.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorme: Not applicable.
6. Biological Resources. Would the project:
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 the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Depart. of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, 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 corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
13
0
X
F9
0
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance.
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion: The project site is adjacent to a public street, residential uses and Adobe Creek. The project site is not
known to provide habitat for any special status species or to be a wildlife corridor. The project site contains no
wetlands, riparian habitat, or other water sources. No conservation plans apply to the project site. The site has been
used as farm and/or pasture land as far back as 1958 per historic aerial photographs.
The site contains no significant vegetation; therefore an arborist report was not required.
Lastly, there is no Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan that exists for Petaluma, which would regulate the proposed development on this parcel. For
these reasons, no significant impacts to the existing biological resources will be created as a result of this proposal.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
Noise. Would the project result in?
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels X
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X
groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels?
C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise X
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
C. For a project located within an airport land use plan X
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 or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip X
would the project expose people residing or
14 SQ
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Discussion: The community Health and Safety Element of the Petaluma General Plan sets forth goals and policies
related to community noise. The objective of the policies and programs set forth in the Noise Element is to "minimize
the amount of noise that future development creates and the amount of noise to which the community is exposed".
The General Plan establishes 60Ldn as the maximum "normally acceptable" noise level for exterior use areas and 45
Ldn as the interior noise level in single-family residential developments. The noise environment on the site results
primarily from vehicular traffic on Casa Grande Rd. Intermittent noisy activities associated with Casa Grande High
School (athletics, social activities, school bells) may be audible at times, but would not significantly effect the overall
noise environment.
The consulting firm of Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. conducted an environmental noise assessment to evaluate the
compatibility of the development with respect to the environmental noise levels at the project site and evaluate noise
impacts upon sensitive receptors in the area. In summary, the noise assessment concludes that noise impacts would be
less than significant with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and standard construction
noise controls.
Interior average noise levels in new residential development must be maintained at or below 45 dBA per the State
Building Code. Mitigation measures recommended by the report from Illingworth and Rodkin will be required as
conditions of approval and will reduce the impact to a less -than -significant level.
Noise levels at back porches of the residences adjacent to Casa Grande Road would be approximately 71 dBA.
Typically, Petalulma noise levels would not be applicable to porches. The community building and the promenade
area (between Buildings A and B) would be shielded by the residential buildings and would experience noise levels of
less the 60 dBA. These outdoor land uses would be considered "normally acceptable" by the City of Petaluma
criteria.
The Noise Study also finds that during construction noise levels will be temporarily elevated in the area. Because of
the proximity to existing residences, it is recommended that construction hours be limited.
Additionally, as with each construction project, all construction activities must comply with applicable Performance
Standards in the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code.
While residential development of this site will result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity, the project site is currently surrounded by residential and quasi -public uses and the effect of additional
residential development will be less than significant.
This site is within the Petaluma Municipal Airport's land use study area of the Sonoma County Comprehensive
Airport Land Use Plan, prepared by Coffman Associates, Inc. dated January 2001. However, it is not within the
Airport's referral area as designated by that Land Use Plan area and therefore, no special measures are recommended
by the Plan.
Miduation Measures/Monitoring:
1. Construction hours are limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Construction is
prohibited on Sunday and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma.
15 51
Casa Grande PEP 466 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -6041 -CR
2. There shall be no start up of internal combustion engines on construction related machinery or equipment
prior to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday.
3. Delivery of materials or equipment is limited to Monday through Friday (non -holiday) between 7:30 a.m. and
6:00 p.m.
4. Machinery shall not be cleaned past 7:00 p.m. or serviced past 6:45 p.m. Monday through Friday.
5. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engine shall be properly mufflered and
maintained.
6. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion is prohibited.
7. All stationary noise generating construction equipment shall be located as far as practical from existing
nearby residences and other noise sensitive land uses. All such equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
8. Quiet construction equipment, in particular air compressors, shall be used whenever possible.
The project applicant shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator", such as the contractor or contractor's
representative, who is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The
disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler,
etc,) and take measures to correct the problem. The name and phone number of the disturbance coordinator
shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site and the location shall be included on improvements
plans and building permit plans submitted to the City for review.
8. Visual Quality and Aesthetics. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ( ( X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources including, X
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character ` X
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare I X
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion:
The site is not in an arca designated as a scenic resource or highway. 17he project will include four groups of two story
buildings approximately 29 feet tall. Building A will be set back approximately 20 feet from the edge of Casa Grande
Rd. and Building D will be set back approximately 75 feet from the centerline of Adobe Creek and 170 feet from the
nearest house on Spyglass Road. The buildings will alter the views to the cast of Sonoma Mountain for motorists and
pedestrians/cyclists traveling on Casa Grande Rd and views to the west for motorists and pedestrians/cyclists traveling
on Ely Boulevard. However, the height, and setbacks of the buildings are consistent with the surrounding area and
therefore the project does not create a significant visual impact.
16 J;�
Potentially
Less than
Loss 17mn
No
Significant
significant
Significant
Impact
impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
2. There shall be no start up of internal combustion engines on construction related machinery or equipment
prior to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday.
3. Delivery of materials or equipment is limited to Monday through Friday (non -holiday) between 7:30 a.m. and
6:00 p.m.
4. Machinery shall not be cleaned past 7:00 p.m. or serviced past 6:45 p.m. Monday through Friday.
5. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engine shall be properly mufflered and
maintained.
6. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion is prohibited.
7. All stationary noise generating construction equipment shall be located as far as practical from existing
nearby residences and other noise sensitive land uses. All such equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
8. Quiet construction equipment, in particular air compressors, shall be used whenever possible.
The project applicant shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator", such as the contractor or contractor's
representative, who is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The
disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler,
etc,) and take measures to correct the problem. The name and phone number of the disturbance coordinator
shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site and the location shall be included on improvements
plans and building permit plans submitted to the City for review.
8. Visual Quality and Aesthetics. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ( ( X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources including, X
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character ` X
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare I X
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion:
The site is not in an arca designated as a scenic resource or highway. 17he project will include four groups of two story
buildings approximately 29 feet tall. Building A will be set back approximately 20 feet from the edge of Casa Grande
Rd. and Building D will be set back approximately 75 feet from the centerline of Adobe Creek and 170 feet from the
nearest house on Spyglass Road. The buildings will alter the views to the cast of Sonoma Mountain for motorists and
pedestrians/cyclists traveling on Casa Grande Rd and views to the west for motorists and pedestrians/cyclists traveling
on Ely Boulevard. However, the height, and setbacks of the buildings are consistent with the surrounding area and
therefore the project does not create a significant visual impact.
16 J;�
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
"PoWnti2,11,ytLess than Less ThanNo
Significant Significant Impact
w/Mitigation Impact
Measures
All exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and shielded to prevent glare and intrusion
onto adjacent properties. Plans submitted for project review and approval shall incorporate lighting plans, which show
the location and design of all proposed streetlights, and any other exterior lighting proposed. Proposed outdoor
lighting in conjunction with development shall include design measures to reduce private light impacts i.e., outdoor
lights only (no flood lights), low profile light standards and/or wall mounted lights, lights attached to buildings shall
provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall, no direct glare.
Shade trees shall be incorporated on improvement plans along public streets and within parking areas shall be in
conformance with the City's Site Plan and Architectural Review Guidelines to reduce glare and provide shade and
screening.
Architectural detail, landscaping plans and detailed site plans shall be subject to review by the City and conform to
Site Plan and Architectural Review Design Guidelines, prior to issuance of building permits.
The project will not create a new source of substantial light and glare. The development of the new parcels with
commercial and residential uses would increase the light and glare in the immediate area; however, the lighting would
be consistent with that typically associated with these uses and is required to comply with the Zoning Ordinance
Performance Standards for light and glare. Exterior lighting would be reviewed as part of the SPARC review. Any
new light and glare associated with the project is expected to be less than significant.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine,: Not applicable.
9. Hazards & Hazardous Materials. Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d. Be located on a site, which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5, and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
C. 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 result in a safety hazard for
X
G!
R9
X
X
17 53
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
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 interferes
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency 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?
Potentially Less than Less Than No
Signiricant Significart Significant Impact
Impact "/Mitigation Impact
Measures
X
9
M
Discussion:
The applicant submitted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment by Miller Pacific Engineering Group, which
concluded that based on records reviewed, interviews, and site reconnaissance there is no evidence of significant
quantities of hazardous materials or significant contamination that presently affects the project site.
The proposed project would not create a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances including but not
limited to oil, pesticides, smoky chemicals, or radiation, in the event of an accident. The project will not interfere with
emergency evacuation plans, create potential health hazards, or result in an increase in fire hazards due to flammable
brush, grass or trees. No storage of chemical or hazardous materials is anticipated with the use of this site. Except
during construction when equipment may be used requiring various types of fuel, the project does not involve
hazardous substances.
The project is located within two miles of an airport and within an airport land use plan (Petaluma Municipal Airport
Chapter of the 2001 Sonoma County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan). However, the airport land use plan
requires that planes tum north toward the county land and not toward the city. Tlrns, planes are required to turn away
from the subject site. For this reason, the safety hazard for people residing in the project area appears to be less than
significant.
During construction, the applicant shall comply with all existing Federal and State safety regulations related to the
transport, use, handling, storage, and/or disposal of potentially hazardous substances. A Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will include specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) related to hazardous
materials will be implemented during construction.
For construction activities involving storage of chemicals or hazardous materials on-site, the applicant shall file a
declaration form with the Fire Marshal's office and shall obtain a hazardous materials storage permit.
If hazardous materials are to be used or stored on-site, the applicant shall prepare a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for
approval by the Fire Marshal. The RMP shall include the following as appropriate:
The applicant shall provide for proper containment within storage areas for hazardous materials and shall
maintain emergency equipment and supplies, as specified by the Fire Marshal, to address any spills or leaks
from the facilities.
18 54
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. O5 -GPA -0041 -CR
No
Impact
The applicant shall identify any potentially hazardous substances or contamination existing on-site and shall
provide for proper treatment, removal, and disposal during construction.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable
10. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the 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?
f Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs X
supporting alternative transportafion, i.e., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Discussion:
X
X
X
A traffic study prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Ine.(W-trans) provides an
analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Two intersections were evaluated within the project area, Casa
Grande Rd./Ely Blvd. and Casa Grande Rd./McDowell Blvd.
Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger developments with
multiple uses. The project is anticipated to generate 209 daily trips of which 5 will be during the a.m. and 7 during the
p.m. peak hour.
The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are expected to occur
with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels. Under this scenario, all of the study
intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
significant
Significant
significant
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
No
Impact
The applicant shall identify any potentially hazardous substances or contamination existing on-site and shall
provide for proper treatment, removal, and disposal during construction.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable
10. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the 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?
f Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs X
supporting alternative transportafion, i.e., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Discussion:
X
X
X
A traffic study prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Ine.(W-trans) provides an
analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Two intersections were evaluated within the project area, Casa
Grande Rd./Ely Blvd. and Casa Grande Rd./McDowell Blvd.
Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger developments with
multiple uses. The project is anticipated to generate 209 daily trips of which 5 will be during the a.m. and 7 during the
p.m. peak hour.
The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are expected to occur
with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels. Under this scenario, all of the study
intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
No
Impact
The project plan identifies a single access connection to Casa Grande Road, The access driveway will extend to the
southeast to a circular turn -a -around and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to right turns in and out
onto Casa Grande Rd. by the existing landscaped median island. Residents and guests exiting the site and wishing to
travel west on Casa Grande Rd. have the opportunity to make U-turns at the Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout.
Residents and guests arriving from the east would be required to make a U-turn from the two-way left -turn lane which
is located opposite Casa Grande High School to enter the site.
The project provides 44 parking spaces, 3 are handicap and 9 are compact. The City's PUD development standards
allow for more flexible parking requirements than standard zoning. The City of Petaluma does not define parking
standards for senior housing complexes. However, the traffic study researched other communities and found that the
County of Monterey requires one parking space for each two units plus one guest space for each eight units. Under
these requirements this project would exceed the standard.
A small portion of the trips to the site would be via public transit. The existing route provided by Petaluma Transit on
Casa Grande Rd. adjacent to the project site is expected to be adequate to serve the potential demand.
There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to construction vehicles
entering and exiting via Casa Grande Rd. Construction vehicles will be contained to the site to the extent possible
and will not impact the movement of local traffic. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and the
Police Department to ensure that the project provides adequate access for emergency vehicles.
The developer shall be responsible for a fair share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee as established
through City Ordinance and in the City's Special Development Fee handout.
In March 2000, the City Council adopted the City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan and Map as an amendment to the City's
General Plan Circulation Element. The Plan states that the City shall route development plans to the Petaluma
Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBAC), allowing consideration of bicycle/pedestrian issues. The
PBAC reviewed the proposed project and provided specific recommendations and conditions. These
recommendations included bike parking, lighting, benches, drinking fountains, bikeways and signs. Staff has
reviewed these recommendations and forwarded those which are consistent with the City of Petaluma Bike Plan
and feasible as conditions of approval to the Planning Commission, City Council and Site Plan and Architectural
Review Committee. Thus, the project would comply with the adopted policies, plans or programs supporting
alternative transportation.
Miti¢ation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable
11. Public Services. Would the project:
a. 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:
20 56
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
No
Impact
The project plan identifies a single access connection to Casa Grande Road, The access driveway will extend to the
southeast to a circular turn -a -around and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to right turns in and out
onto Casa Grande Rd. by the existing landscaped median island. Residents and guests exiting the site and wishing to
travel west on Casa Grande Rd. have the opportunity to make U-turns at the Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout.
Residents and guests arriving from the east would be required to make a U-turn from the two-way left -turn lane which
is located opposite Casa Grande High School to enter the site.
The project provides 44 parking spaces, 3 are handicap and 9 are compact. The City's PUD development standards
allow for more flexible parking requirements than standard zoning. The City of Petaluma does not define parking
standards for senior housing complexes. However, the traffic study researched other communities and found that the
County of Monterey requires one parking space for each two units plus one guest space for each eight units. Under
these requirements this project would exceed the standard.
A small portion of the trips to the site would be via public transit. The existing route provided by Petaluma Transit on
Casa Grande Rd. adjacent to the project site is expected to be adequate to serve the potential demand.
There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to construction vehicles
entering and exiting via Casa Grande Rd. Construction vehicles will be contained to the site to the extent possible
and will not impact the movement of local traffic. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and the
Police Department to ensure that the project provides adequate access for emergency vehicles.
The developer shall be responsible for a fair share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee as established
through City Ordinance and in the City's Special Development Fee handout.
In March 2000, the City Council adopted the City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan and Map as an amendment to the City's
General Plan Circulation Element. The Plan states that the City shall route development plans to the Petaluma
Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBAC), allowing consideration of bicycle/pedestrian issues. The
PBAC reviewed the proposed project and provided specific recommendations and conditions. These
recommendations included bike parking, lighting, benches, drinking fountains, bikeways and signs. Staff has
reviewed these recommendations and forwarded those which are consistent with the City of Petaluma Bike Plan
and feasible as conditions of approval to the Planning Commission, City Council and Site Plan and Architectural
Review Committee. Thus, the project would comply with the adopted policies, plans or programs supporting
alternative transportation.
Miti¢ation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable
11. Public Services. Would the project:
a. 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:
20 56
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. O5 -GPA -0041 -CR
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially Less than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact w/Mitigation Impact
Measures
X
X
X
X
X
Discussion: The development is proposed to occur within an urbanized area, which is already serviced, by a variety
of public services. Additional fire and police service calls may occur as a result of this proposal. However, the impact
upon schools and parks would not be significantly more than is proposed by the current General Plan designation.
The nearest parks and open space areas to the project site are Del Oro Park Crinella Mini Park both are approximately
half mile from the project site. The project proposes public open space areas in terms of walking paths, court yards, a
community garden and bocci court. In addition each unit has a private courtyard or balcony.
The applicant will be required to pay the applicable development fees that are assigned to all other proposals prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to address the incremental impact that the proposal presents to all public
services including parks. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts will occur as a result of this proposal.
Mitieation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable
12. Recreation.
a. Would the project increase the use of existing X
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 X
require the construction or expansion on
recreational facilities, which night have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion:
The addition of 58 senior residential units will not significantly increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities in the area. The nearest parks and open space areas to the project site
are Del Oro Park and Crinella Mini Park both are approximately 1/4 mile from the project site. The project
proposes public open space areas in terms of walking paths, court yards, a community garden and bocci court. In
addition each unit has a private courtyard or balcony.
Also, the applicant will be required to pay the applicable park fees that are assigned to all proposals prior to issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy to address the incremental impact to park usage. Therefore, the recreation impacts that
will occur as a result of this proposal are less than significant.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorin$: Not applicable.
21
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
13.
Utilities Infrastructure. Would the project:
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
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 the
project from existing entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Potentially Less than
Significant Significant
Impact %V/Mitigation
Measures
Less ThanI No
Significant Impact
Impact
►a
F.51
iti
X
R
X
X
Discussion: The subject property is within a largely developed area and is anticipate by the Petaluma General Plan.
For this reason, it is expected that no impacts to the utility infrastructure will occur as a result of this proposal.
Development of the proposed project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements established by the
RWQCB. The site is already served by Pacific Gas & Electric and will have adequate water and sewer service.
The City's treatment plant has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional flow anticipated from the proposed
development. The proposed project is an infill site and would require extensions of existing service lines to provide
water, sewer, natural gas, electric, and storm drain utilities to the new residences. This extension is consistent with
the service needs expected by the General Plan.
The proposed development will comply with all federal, state, and local requirements for solid waste reduction and
recycling. A private company, under contract with the City of Petaluma, will provide solid waste disposal services to
the proposed project site. Solid waste from the general area is transported to the Sonoma County Central Landfill or
other appropriate facility, which has sufficient capacity. To minimize impacts on landfill capacity, the project will
recycle construction and demolition debris to the maximum extent feasible.
All new development approved within the City shall connect to the City's sewer and water system. The applicant
or subsequent owner/builder shall be responsible for the payment of Sewer and Water Connection fees to offset
impacts on City utilities. Water and sewer connections fees are calculated at time of building permit issuance, and
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially Less than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact w/Mitigation Impact
Measures
are due and payable prior to final inspection, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or connection to the City's
utility system.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
14. Mineral Resources. Would the project:
a. Result in the loss or availability of a known mineral X
resource that would be of value to the region, the
residents and/or the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery size delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
Discussion: There is no information about this site from the General Plan or additional studies, which indicates that
the site has been known to be a mineral resource. The proposed project would not create a significant impact to
known mineral resources.
Mitigation Measures/Monitorinu: Not applicable.
15. Cultural Resources. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the X
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the X
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those X
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion: The site is not known to contain any significant archaeological or historic materials or resources. The
1987 General Plan map of potential archeological resources indicates that there is a low probability of archeological
resources on the project site.
A standard condition of approval states that should any archeological/historical remains be encountered during
grading, work shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to evaluate the artifacts and
to recommend further action. The project will not 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.
23 51
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
NV/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
16. Aarieultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or X
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 X
a Williamson Act contract?
C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, X
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Discussion: The project site is not adjacent to agricultural lands and would not conflict with existing Williamson Act
contracts or other agriculturally related uses. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural resources will occur as a result of
this proposal.
Mideation Measures/Monitorins: Not applicable.
17. Mandatory Findings of Sianificance.
Yes No
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, X
substantially reduce the habitat of 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 X
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
d. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse X
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
24
0
Casa Grande PEP 400 Casa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Discussion: The project
disadvantage of long-term,
impacts on human beings.
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
would not have a significant effect on the environment, achieve short-term, to the
environmental goals, have cumulative adverse impacts, or cause substantial adverse
Mifleation Measures/Monitorina: N/A
IMPLEMENTATION:
1. The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits from responsible agencies and provide
proof of compliance to the City prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required mitigation measures and
conditions into the design and improvement plans and specifications for the project.
3. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, and agents involved in the project
implementation of the mitigation measures and conditions applicable to the project and shall ensure
compliance with such measures and conditions. The applicant shall notify all assigns and transfers of
the sante.
MONITORING:
1. The Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions, and the Fire Department shall review the
improvement and construction plans for conformance with the approved project description and all
applicable codes, conditions, mitigation measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of
a site design review, improvement plans, grading, or building permits.
2. Mitigation Measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or
grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the approved plans and
conditions of approval.
CONSTRUCTION:
1. The applicant shall designate a project manager with authority to implement all mitigation measures
and conditions of approval and provide a statement of his/her name, address, and phone numbers to
the City prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. The applicant's statement appointing a
project manager shall be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
2. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or
grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the approved plans and
conditions of approval.
POST -CONSTRUCTION:
25
Casa Grande PEP 400 Cosa Grande Rd. File No. 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Potentially Less than Less Than No
significant significant significant Impact
Impact wlh/itigation Impact
Measures
The City shall retain a qualified professional to monitor completion or restoration plans or
mitigation plans and reports on the success criteria and management needs.
1. PEP Iian-i n- I . the project applicant, have reviewed this Initial Study
and hereby agree to incorporate the mitigation measures and monitoring programs identified herein into the project.
r
Signature o -App ant
&1305
Date
&W -Planning CommissionUnitial Smdies1400 Casa Grande Rd. PEP 1S.doc
26
M
a0� City of Petaluma, California
Community Development Department
Planning Division
j86$ 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
Project Name: Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) Casa Grande
File Number: 05 -GPA -0041 -CR
Address/Location: 400 Casa Grande Road
Reporting/Monitoring Record - Mitigation Measures
This document has been developed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resource Code Section 21.081.6 to
ensure proper and adequate monitoring or reporting in conjunction with project(s) approval which relies upon a Mitigated Negative
Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report.
DATE DEI'T.
"DEPT. WIDUE FINISDED STAFF
`DATE INITIALS
Noise. Mitigation Measures
1. Construction hours are limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to
7:00 p.m. Construction is prohibited on Sunday and all holidays recognized by
the City of Petaluma.
There shall be no start up of internal combustion engines on construction related
machinery or equipment prior to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday.
3. Delivery of materials or equipment is limited to Monday through Friday (non -
holiday) between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
4. Machinery shall not be cleaned past 7:00 p.m. or serviced past 6:45 p.m. Monday
through Friday.
5. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engine shall be
properly mufflered and maintained.
— 6. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal
combustion is prohibited.
7. All stationary noise generating construction equipment shall be located as far as
practical from existing nearby residences and other noise sensitive land uses. All
such equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
Department
Requested By or Due Date Page 1
PD
Planning Division
FM
Final Map
FM
Fire Marshal
BP
Building Permit
ENG
Engineering
CO
Certificate of Occupancy /
BD
Building Division
SPARC
Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (O
�
LTM
Long -Term Monitorin
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) Casa Grande
City ofPetalunia, California
Reporting/Monitoring Record - Mitigation Measures for Approval
8. Quiet construction equipment, in particular air compressors, shall be used
whenever possible.
— 9. The project applicant shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator", such as
the contractor or contractor's representative, who is responsible for responding to
any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler,
etc.) and take measures to correct the problem. The name and phone number of
the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site
and the location shall be included on improvements plans and building permit
plans submitted to the City for review.
Department
PD Planning Division
FM Fire Marsbal
ENG Engineering
BD Building Division
IMPLEMENTATION:
L The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits from responsible
agencies and provide proof of compliance to the City prior to issuance of
grading or building permits.
— 2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required
mitigation measures and conditions into the design and improvement plans and
specifications for the project.
— 3. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, and agents involved in the
project implementation of the mitigation measures and conditions applicable to
the project and shall ensure compliance with such measures and conditions. The
applicant shall notify all assigns and transfers of the same.
MONITORING:
1. The Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions, and the Fire Department shall
review the improvement and construction plans for conformance with the
approved project description and all applicable codes, conditions, mitigation
measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of a site design review,
improvement plans, grading, or building permits.
2. Mitigation Measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on
the building or grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for
construction.
Requested By or Due Date Page 2
FM Final Map
BP Building Permit
CO Certificate of Occupancy
SPARC Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
LTM Long -Term Monitoring
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) Casa Grande
City of Petah nta, California
Reporting/Monitoring Record - Mitigation Measures for Approval
City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the
approved plans and conditions of approval.
CONSTRUCTION:
— 1. The applicant shall designate a project manager with authority to implement all
mitigation measures and conditions of approval and provide a statement of
his/her name, address, and phone numbers to the City prior to issuance of any
grading or building permits. The applicant's statement appointing a project
manager shall be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
2. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on
the building or grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for
construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the
approved plans and conditions of approval.
POST -CONSTRUCTION:
The City shall retain a qualified professional to monitor completion of
restoration plans or mitigation plans and reports on the success criteria and
management needs.
S:\monitoring\Casa Grande PEP -400 Casa Grande Road.doc
Department
Reauested By or Due Date Page 3
PD
Planning Division
FM
Final Map
FM
ENG
Fire Marshal
Engineering
BP
CO
Building Permit
Certificate of Occupancy 65
BD
Building Division
SPARC
Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
LTM
Long -Term Monitoring
ATTACHMENT 8
Studies:
■ Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (without
appendices) by Miller Pacific Engineering Group
■ Traffic Impact Analysis (without appendices) by W -
Trans
■ Geotechnical Investigation (without appendices) by
Miller Pacific Engineering Group
is Environmental Noise Study by Illingworth & Rodkin,
Inc.
Note: if you would like a copy of the appendices please
contact the Community Development Department.
911
504 Redwood Blvd.
Suit, L0
ocato. Califetni;:9yea_
T � 1`5 / 362-3e�q
F 41; 1362-3450
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
January 3, 2005
Prepared For:
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties Housing
3920 Cypress Drive
Petaluma, California 94954
Attn: Paula Cook
Job No. 1111.02
CERTIFICATION AND LIMITATION
This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report is an instrument of services and is copyrighted. It is provided for the sole use of the
party named above. No other party may use or rely on this report without written permission and separate contractual agreement with
Miller Pacific Engineering Group. The report has been prepared in accordance with the ordinary standard of care at this time. Such
care not withstanding, there is no warranty or guaranty that hazardous materials do not exist on the site. Because conditions may
change wfth the passage of time, this report must be updated if there is any apparent change at or near the site and after two years from
the issue date,
MILLER PACIFIC ENGINEERING GROUP
(A California cor
No. C 058622
Exp, 12/31/06
Timothy J. Re OF CA -W
Civil Engineer No. _
(Expires 12/31/06)
6f
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Purpose and Scope 1
B. Limitations of Assessment 2
II, SITE DESCRIPTION 3
A. Site Location and Adjacent Properties 3
B. Summary of Site History 3
C. Topography and Local Geology 3
D. Site Drainage and Groundwater 4
III. RECORDS REVIEW 5
A. Environmental Records Search 5
B. Federal and State Environmental Databases 5
C. Review of Historic Aerial Photographs 5
IV. INTERVIEWS 7
A. Current Owner 7
V. SITE RECONNAISSANCE 8
VI. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
A. On-site Findings 9
B. Off-site Findings 9
C. Recommendations 9
FIGURES
Site Location Map Figure 1
APPENDICES
EDR — Radius Map Report Appendix A
0
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Scope
This report presents the results of our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the
property located at 400 Casa Grande Road in Petaluma, California. This Phase I ESA was
performed for Petaluma Ecumenical Properties Housing of Petaluma, California, and is provided
for their sole use. No other party may use or rely on the findings, opinions, and information in this
report without the consent of Petaluma Ecumenical Properties Housing and the written permission
and agreement of Miller Pacific Engineering Group (MPEG).
A Phase I ESA is conducted to form an opinion regarding the potential for hazardous materials to
exist at a site at levels likely to warrant mitigation pursuant to current and applicable regulations.
Our opinion relative to the potential for discovery of hazardous materials is based upon
information derived from our site reconnaissance and other activities described in this report.
We conducted the Phase I ESA according to the current ordinary and reasonable standard of care
at this time. Our work generally followed the guidelines described by ASTM and ASFE as
applicable for the site and conditions. Our scope of work includes the following:
• Review of Federal and State environmental records obtained through a database
search by Environmental Data Resources to screen for environmentally significant
properties in the vicinity of the site;
6 Development of a recent site history through prior reports and a review of historic
aerial photographs;
Compilation of known site subsurface and groundwater conditions;
f On-site reconnaissance to visually identify indicators of the existence of hazardous
materials;
6 Interview with the current Owner; and
4 Preparation of this Phase I ESA report including summary of activities, findings,
and our opinion and recommendations regarding need for future investigation.
'-
;x ;r,t
B. Limitations of Assessment
The conditions we have observed at and near the site are subject to change. Certain indicators
of the presence of hazardous materials may have been latent at the time of site reconnaissance
and may subsequently become observable. In a similar manner, the research effort conducted
for a Phase I ESA is limited. Accordingly, it is possible that our research, while fully appropriate
for a Phase I ESA, may not have included all important information sources.
The normal standard of care for an ESA does not include any specific inquiry with respect to
radon, methane, asbestos, lead paint, or wetlands and we therefore did not address any of
these hazards. For various reasons, our scope of work also did not include the following:
Review and research of chain-of-title/ownership information.
Interviews with previous owners of the property (other than the current owner's
representative).
Review of studies and reports, if any, for the site or adjacent sites other than
those specifically stated in this report;
® Visit to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; and
i Ground penetration, soil or groundwater sampling and analysis.
The findings and opinions presented in this ESA report are based on information obtained from
a variety of sources that we believe are reliable. Nonetheless, there is no guarantee of the
authenticity or reliability of the information upon which we have relied.
2
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
A. Site Location and Adiacent Properties
The site is located at 400 Casa Grande Road in Petaluma, California. The site location is shown
on the Site Location Map, Figure 1. The property is a rectangular parcel bounded on the
northwest by Casa Grande Road, on the southwest and northeast by single-family residential
properties, and on the southeast by Adobe Creek. The site is surrounded on three sides by
residential developments and is adjacent to Casa Grande Road on the northwest. The Casa
Grande High School campus is located on the opposite side of Casa Grande Road form the site
and a residential subdivision is located on the opposite bank of Adobe Creek from the site
B. Summary of Site History
We researched the site history to identify previous uses of the property that could have generated
on-site contamination. The site history was developed based on interviews, historic aerial
photograph reviews, and records review discussed in detail later in this report. Our research
indicates that the property has had no previous use except as farm and/or pastureland.
C. Topoqraphv and Local Geoloov
The relatively flat site is located in an alluvial valley. Based on review of the USGS 7.5 minute
Petaluma River Quadrangle, the site elevation is approximately 50 feet above sea level. Surface
gradients generally slope gently towards the south-southwest.
The site geology and subsurface conditions are discussed in detail in our Geotechnical
Investigation Report for the site, dated May 10, 2004. As part of our geotechnical investigation,
we explored subsurface conditions at the site by drilling G exploratory borings at various
locations on site. A surface layer of highly plastic clay soil over Alluvial soils (Qa) were
encountered in the borings. The alluvial soils consist of variable mixtures of clays, silts, sands
and gravels that were relatively well consolidated. During our subsurface exploration we did not
observe any visual or olfactory signs of hydrocarbon or other hazardous material contamination.
�1
D. Site Drainaqe and Groundwater
The site is undeveloped, so no drainage facilities exist. Topography in the area generally
slopes down very gently towards the south/southwest.
During our geotechnical investigation, we encountered groundwater at depths as shallow as five
feet below ground level immediately after drilling. Groundwater flows in the vicinity of the
project site are anticipated to be in a southerly direction
4
1diik SIG"GRR!!P.
III. RECORDS REVIEW
A. Environmental Records Search
Readily available records were reviewed by Miller Pacific Engineering Group personnel. Records
included computer databases, pictorial histories, and our previous Geotechnical Investigation of
the site. Miller Pacific Engineering Group cannot confirm the completeness of searches
conducted by others.
B. Federal and State Environmental Databases
A computer database search of Federal and State environmental records was conducted. The
relevant, abbreviated findings of the database search, which are presented as Appendix A,
contain information from standard ASTM databases as well as others. One site was identified in
the database search within one mile of the project. Sola Optical, at 1500 Cader Lane, is listed
on the Federal National Priority List, the California State Department of Health Services list, and
Federal Record of Decision List. Optical lenses have been manufactured at the site since 1978.
Contaminated soil and shallow ground water were detected at the site in the early 1980's.
Monitoring and remediation of the site has been on-going since 1987. The California Regional
Water Quality Control Board is the Lead Agency.
C. Review of Historic Aerial Photooraohs
We reviewed historic aerial photographs available from Pacific Aerial Surveys of Oakland,
California to obtain information about the history of development at the site and in the nearby
vicinity. The years of the available photos showing the site ranged from 1956 through 2000. A
summary of site conditions based on the photo review is provided below:
5
,41
1J
June 12. 1956 (Scale 1:24.000 —AV 222-05-14.15)
Site appears to be plowed for farming. The two residences directly southwest and
northeast of the property appear essentially the same as today, All surrounding properties
are plowed agricultural land with scattered farmhouses. Neither Casa Grande High School
nor present-day adjacent residential subdivisions have been constructed. Casa Grande
Creek is clearly visible at approximately its present location.
Julv 9. 1963 (Scale 1:36.000 —AV 550-01-06.07)
Conditions are essentially as in previous photo.
Auoust 24. 1970 (Scale 1:48.000 —AV 965-03-11.12)
Areas directly adjacent to the property are essentially the same. Some new residential
subdivisions have been built or are under construction approximately Y2 to 1 -mile west of
the site.
September 2. 1975 (Scale 1:54,000—AV 1215-04010.11)
Conditions on the site are essentially the same. Casa Grande High School appears to be
completed, or maybe under construction. New residential subdivisions have been
constructed adjacent to the western side of the Casa Grande High School Campus,
Mav 3. 1980 (Scale 1:24.000 — CIR — SON 20-27. 28)
Conditions are similar to the 1975 photo except more playfields are visible at the high
school and new residential subdivisions have been built approximately '14 to'/x-mile south
of the site.
April 19, 1986 (Scale 1:12.000 — AV 2860-9-2.3.�
Conditions are substantially similar to the 1980 photo except that some residential
subdivisions southeast of Casa Grande Creek have been constructed.
October 9. 1991 (Scale 1:12.000 — AV 4070-2-39.40)
Conditions are substantially similar to the 1986 photo. More new residential subdivision
construction is proceeding southeast bank of Casa Grande Creek.
Auoust 9. 1995 (Scale 1:12.000 — AV 4890-15-27.28)
Conditions are similar to the 1991 photo.
Mav 3. 2000 (Scale 1:12.000 — Son AV 6540-121-36.37)
Conditions are similar to the 1995 photo.
14—
IV. INTERVIEWS
A. General
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP) currently has an option to purchase the property. There
is no current tenant of the property and previous owners were not available for interview. We
understand that PEP is not aware of previous manufacturing or other industrial processing at or
adjacent to the site; and does not believe that the site has been previously used as a gasoline
station.
7
45
'�EIiGiNEEHING"GB,GUP
V. SITE RECONNAISSANCE
We performed a reconnaissance of the project site on December 29, 2004. The purpose of our
reconnaissance was to observe the existing conditions and to visually identify indicators of
hazardous material. We walked and visually observed the entire site. During our site walks we
did not observe staining or other evidence of spills, nor did we observe drums or other storage
devices. We did not observe indications of significant contamination on the property. Minor
ponded water was present at the ground surface at several locations on the property. The water
did not exhibit a "sheen" or odor indicative of contamination.
5
1�
S�,NG�EE(�iNG {,ijDllP r`
VI. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. On-site Findinqs
Based on our records review, interviews, and site reconnaissance, we find there is no evidence
of significant quantities of hazardous materials or significant contamination that presently affect
the project site. We therefore conclude that there is no visual or historic evidence to suggest
that significant hazardous substances are present or that significant contamination has occurred
at the site.
B. Off-site Findinqs
We found one off-site facility within a one -mile radius of the site where hazardous materials
were historically or are presently used and stored and where leaking tanks have been reported.
However, the site has been remediated and under monitoring by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board since 1987 and we judge that the potential for significant on-site
contamination from this off-site sources is therefore low.
C. Recommendations
Because our research, interviews and site reconnaissance did not suggest the presence of
environmental contamination at the site, we find no basis for further investigation or studies at
the present time and recommend no additional work be performed.
9
11
- ,i' •_-,, h`. .__100__. � _� i< � I � ❑° _,
,
'ca
{ n h
' : ,J11t,11:/ e�,__��rii_utk--� t,i' '---- _ � �Q � �2_•'"4—'
wall
4V. / /35,, s�$Lole Histaricnl
_a; •
6 PFTALLT?YlA. �° r
'.-per` 01kP Su6s!zb::n' /�
"—
' tra r`. �v•/' / /2. Tic I - 1-'T.wJ`�� i��-. SYA. c� 'v� `sem
W—M
�j! •.'�T•!• af2t ^'.f.- `y ��3 ,:.r --•3'r `.�.r \_'�--- � _
":
_r-,s•-.t:w:: s:;i:!�, :_5'': az'r fir( �,• ;`Y ----- —so
limos:
-. �.��r•�;' `�=°i<��< ,`, .SIT<�� _
I r» �ZC 2te� .r 1-� p, 'Yn pi''
BM
w. i -q - } b0
SITE LOCATION
SCALE
0 1000 2000 0000 FEET
ruau.Lre..u..�—a�.,eieww,n euuL::uulLwY:I Q
a L00 1000 METER Z
REFERENCE: DeLorme 3D TopoQuads, 1999
COPYRIGHT 2005, MILLER PACIFIC ENGINEERING GROUP
FILE S00 MOp.&w
SITE LOCATION MAP
Miller Pacific 400 Casa Grande
ENGINEERING:GROUP - Petaluma, California
Project 1111.02 Date 2/5/05 gyppvec,` Figure
No.
I V
w -t ra n s
Whitlock & Weinberger
TM.portation, Inc.
509 Seventh Street
Suite 101
Santa Rosa CA 95401
voice 707542.9500
fa 707542-9590
web www.w-trans.com
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande
in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction and Study Parameters...................................................... I
Existing Conditions................................................................... 6
Future Conditions.................................................................... 8
Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................... 14
Study Participants and References...................................................... 15
Figures
I Study Area and Traffic Volumes .................................................. 2
2 Site Plan..................................................................... 9
Tables
I Intersection Level of Service Criteria .............................................. 4
2 Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Calculations ....................... 6
3 Trip Generation Summary ...................................................... 8
4 Trip Distribution/Roadway Segment Vehicle Trips ................................ 10
5 Parking Demand ....................................................... II
6 Summary of Future PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Calculations ............. 12
Appendices
A Level of Service Calculations
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma 1%1%11
December I, 2004 Page i w-rra ns ){
Introduction and Study Parameters
This report presents an analysis of the traffic impacts that would be expected from the development of a
senior housing project on the southeasterly side of Casa Grande Road in the City of Petaluma. This traffic
study was completed in accordance with standard criteria, and is consistent with previous analyses for the
City and standard traffic engineering techniques. This work effort is intended to provide information on
potential traffic impacts of the proposed project as well as to act as a foundation for subsequent
environmental documentation.
Prelude
The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City staff and policy makers such as Planning
Commissioners and City Council members with data which they can use to make an Informed decision
regarding the potential traffic impacts of an alternative project, and any associated improvements which
would be required in order to mitigate these impacts to a level of insignificance as defined by the City's
General Plan. Traffic Impacts are typically evaluated by determining the number of trips the new use would
be expected to generate, distributing the new trips to the surrounding street system based on existing travel
patterns or anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, then analyzing the impact the new
traffic would be expected to have on critical intersections included in the study area.
Project Profile
The project consists of the development of a senior residential project on a parcel which currently has a
General Plan designation of Urban Standard. The currently vacant site will be improved to include S8
attached senior residential dwellings. The site location is shown in Figure 1.
Setting
The Transportation Element of the Petaluma General Plan contains information on existing circulation
conditions, as well as goals and policies for the development of future circulation systems within the City.
The general objectives of the Transportation Element are to improve traffic flow, provide easy and
convenient access to all areas of the community, and improve connections between the east and west sides
of the City.
There are also objectives related to increasing transit use, encouraging safe bicycle use and accommodating
safe travel for pedestrians.
Study Intersections
The intersections of Casa Grande Road/Ely Boulevard and Casa Grande Road/McDowell Boulevard were
evaluated in this analysis.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Cosa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page I w -trans
011
- ka F? g �. y r-.. a,.t ��,. moi- - - ; � .�r��, Y.� _ .•. .y - � r' -
IoEyJsfing .lumes
9104 I el
G/ w }
8r 4— 203(86)
328(146)
4y. v rbc; 2k xVti �' iTy" _ ak t E Y 4hY ♦ •i } i �3.
4
r'y'a+ ♦,.. M '. $1' �„ R ++ +!.1� ti .fir 4 �., r'Mi� 1 r P §�
IMI
U
'AN
y P e6t,
roj
IV;,It
pie jy�'V
Project Volumes uture lumes
!0A,
S
" t — — — 0(0'tr) (94)
Aqv,
J(J) (218)
Its aoc 0(0) (121j
11
10 Y-
(0)0
:7,4 (0)0 —4
(102)
U
2 2
Olo)
(27)
0�0� (1101
(0)
(0 )0
(107)— 1 0 —
(2
(0)0 67)
Study Periods
The analysis includes the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The a.m. and p.m. peak hours capture the
highest traffic volumes on regional arterial streets and reflect the times when added residential trips will
have the highest potential impact. The a.m. peak hour is the highest volume hour between 7:00 and 9:00
a.m., and the p.m. peak hour is between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
Study Scenarios
Four scenarios were evaluated in this study including Existing Conditions, Existing plus Project Conditions,
Future and Future plus Project Conditions. The Existing Conditions scenario is an evaluation of current
traffic operations based on data collected in the field and available in other planning documents. The Existing
plus Project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which would be expected to
occur with the project. A General Plan buildout scenario was evaluated as the Future Conditions scenario;
it is based on anticipated buildout of the current General Plan to the year 2020. The Future plus Project
Conditions scenario presents the expected conditions under General Plan Buildout to the year 2020
together with the addition of this project, which was not anticipated at the time of the General Plan Model
development.
Intersection Level of Service Methodologies
Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes
and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service
A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions.
The LOS designation is generally accompanied by a unit of measure which indicates a level of delay.
The study intersections were analyzed using methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual 2000, (HCM)
Transportation Research Board, 2000. This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection
control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle.
Operating conditions at the all -way stop -controlled study intersection of Casa Grande Road/McDowell
Boulevard were analyzed using the "All -Way Stop -Controlled Intersection" methodology contained in the
2000 Highway Capacity Manual. This methodology evaluates delay for each approach based on turning
movements, opposing and conflicting traffic volumes, and the number of lanes. Average vehicle delay is
computed for the intersection as a whole, and is then related to a Level of Service.
The roundabout methodology was applied to the intersection of Casa Grande Road/Ely Road and is based
on factors including traffic volumes, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity as well as number of lanes and
diameter of the circulating roadway. Average delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation
in this LOS methodology.
The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Table I.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma ��``
IN
December I, 2009 Page 3 w-tra n
Table I
Intersection Level of Service Criteria
°
LOS All -way Stop -Controlled Intersections Roundabout Intersections
A Delay of 0 m 10 seconds. Gaps in traffic are readily available for Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Most vehicles arrive during
°
drivers exiting the minor street. the green phase, so do not stop at all.
B Delay of 10 to 15 seconds. Gaps in traffic are somewhat less Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More vehicles stop than
readily available than with LOS A, but no queuing occurs on the with LOS A, but many drivers still do not have to
P
minor street. stop
C Delay of 15 to 25 seconds. Acceptable gaps in traffic are less Delay of 20 to 35 seconds The number of vehides
frequent, and drivers may approach while another vehicle is stopping is significant, although many still pass through
already waiting to exit the side street without stopping.
C Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. There are fewer acceptable gaps in Delay of 35 to 55 seconds The influence of
traffic, and drivers may enter a queue of one or two vehicles on congestion is noticeable, and most vehicles have to
the side street. stop.
P
E Delay of 35 to 50 seconds. Few acceptable gaps in traffic are Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. Most, if not all, vehicles
available, and longer queues may form on the side street. must stop and drivers consider the delay excessive.
F Delay of more than 50 seconds. Drivers may wait for long Delay of more than 80 seconds. Vehicles may wait
periods before there is an acceptable gap in traffic for exiting the through more than one cycle to clear the intersection.
side streets, creating long queues.
Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
Traffic Operation Standards
P
The minimum acceptable operation for streets under the Petaluma General Plan's adopted Level of Service
(LOS) standard is LOS C where it is currently LOS C or better. Where the LOS was D or E in 1985, it shall
not deteriorate to the next lower level. Since this standard applies specifically to street segments, based
on prior actions taken by the City of Petaluma, LOS D was used as the acceptable standard for signalized
intersections. The study intersections included within the project area are controlled by all -way stops or
a roundabout and the same level of service threshold used for signalized intersections was applied.
On sections of certain arterial streets it is not unusual to have all of the side streets operating at LOS E or
F with long traffic delays, even where side street volumes are very low. In fact, it may be operationally,
physically, and/or financially infeasible to provide mitigation which would allow LOS D conditions or better
from all side streets during peak hours. The most typical mitigation measure used to improve operation
for the side street is a traffic signal, and it is both operationally and financially undesirable to provide a traffic
signal at every intersection along most street segments.
Additionally, a project impact may be considered significant if any of the following conditions are met.
At any unsignalized intersection or driveway approach with significant traffic volumes, the project results
in congestion for the side street exceeding LOS E;
Access at site driveways causes significant delay to traffic flow on public streets;
The onsite circulation plan provides inadequate circulation or is potentially unsafe; or
Site design circulation aspects are inconsistent with local guidelines.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma %*Uu
December I, 2004 Page 4 v,. -tion jJ/
U� t
The Community Character Element of the General Plan also contains circulation -related objectives and
policies. This element directs that pedestrian and bicycle circulation be integrated into street designs and
improvements. It also states that the amount of paving and the apparent width of streets should be reduced
where possible.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma ���
December I, 2004 Page 5 w -trans )��
Existing Conditions
Description of Study Area
The study area consists of Casa Grande Road from McDowell Boulevard to Ely Boulevard together with
the all -way stop controlled intersection of Casa Grande Road/McDowell Boulevard and the roundabout
controlled intersection of Casa Grande Road/Ely Boulevard.
Streets in the Vicinity
Access to the project site would be from a new driveway connecting to Casa Grande Road. Casa Grande
Road is an arterial street which connects to Lakeville Highway, McDowell Boulevard, Ely Boulevard and
Adobe Road. Casa Grande Road has two navel lanes in each direction as well as Class II (on -street) bicycle
lanes and a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour.
Study Intersections
Casa Grande Road/McDowell Boulevard is an intersection of two 4 -lane streets. The intersection of Casa
Grande Road is a single lane roundabout controlled intersection. The study area and location of these
intersections are shown in Figure I.
Existing Intersection Conditions
Based on current traffic volumes, the existing study intersections are operating acceptably at LOS C or
better. The existing volumes are shown in Figure I. The Level of Service calculations are summarized in
Table 2, and copies are provided in Appendix A.
Table 2
Summary of Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Calculations
Intersection
Casa Grande Rd/McDowell
Casa Grande Rd/Ely
Existing Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS
18.1 C 16.0 C
..........................................................
5.0 A 5.1 A
Notes: Delay is in average number of seconds per vehicle
LOS = Level of Service
Collision History
Existing plus Project
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS
18.1 C 16.0 C
...............................................................
5.1 A 5.1 A
The collision history for Casa Grande Road was reviewed for the 3 -year period from January I, 2000, to
December 31, 2003. During that period there were nine collisions reported on Casa Grande Road,
including those at the intersections of Casa Grande Road/Ely Boulevard and Casa Grande Road/McDowell
Boulevard. There were no identified collision patterns which would indicate a street design deficiency.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma \\\
MU
December I, 2004 Page 6 w-tra n
J
a
a
a
a
L
i
P
I
I
g� r
Alternative Transportation Modes
Transit
Public transit service in the area is provided by Petaluma Transit. Petaluma Transit operates the South
McDowell (Green) Route 2 as well as the Ely (Orange) Route 3 on Casa Grande Road with half-hour
headways.
Bicycles
Currently there are designated Class- II (on -street) bicycle lanes on Casa Grande Road.
Pedestrians
Pedestrian facilities in the study area are complete. There are existing sidewalks along the project frontage
on the northerly side of Casa Grande Road which connect to schools and shopping centers.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma -WI
December I, 2004 Page 7 w-tra n
•
r
Future Conditions
Project Description r
The PEP Housing project is being proposed for the construction of 58 attached senior residential dwelling r
units on the southeasterly side of Casa Grande Road. For the purposes of this analysis, 60 dwelling units
were assumed. The site plan is shown in Figure 2.
Trip Generation and Distribution r
Trip generation rates have long been an established tool used by traffic engineers and transportation r
planners to estimate the likely traffic activity of a future project. Trip generation rates are used to evaluate
the potential impacts of a single project or, when incorporated into large regional transportation models,
are used to plan major transportation facilities such as freeways, bus and rail transportation, r
For purposes of estimating the number of trips that the proposed future uses would be expected to
generate, Trip Generation, 7" Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used. This
publication is a standard reference used by jurisdictions throughout the country, and is based on actual trip r
generation studies performed at numerous locations in areas of various populations. The Senior Attached
Dwelling rates (LU #252) were applied.
Table 3 summarizes the trip generation. The PEP Housing Homes Subdivision project is expected to r
generate an average of 209 daily trips, including 5 a.m. peak hour trips and 7 p.m. peak hour trips.
Table 3 r
Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Size Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour r
Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Senior Housing 60 du 3.46 209 10.08 5 2 3 0.1 1 7 4 3 r
Note: du = dwelling unit
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment r
Trips to and from the site are expected to disperse throughout the circulation system in a similar manner r
and proportion as measured at study intersections. The applied trip distribution assumptions and associated
vehicle trips are listed in Table 4.
r
I
r
Trak Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page 8 w -vans% r
q, r
F
No\
Table 4
Trip Distribution/Roadway Segment Vehicle Trips
Existing plus Project Conditions
The Existing plus Project Conditions Scenario provides the results of the evaluation of the potential traffic
impacts which are expected to occur during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with the addition of traffic from
the proposed PEP Housing project to the existing traffic levels. The resulting project added traffic volumes
are shown in Figure 1. As seen in Table 2 the expected operating conditions for all study intersections will
remain well within acceptable standards.
Site Access and Internal Circulation
The project plan identifies a single access connecting to Casa Grande Road. The access drivewaywill extend
to the southeast to a circular turn -a -round and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to right
turns in and out onto Casa Grande Road by the existing landscaped median island. Residents and guests
exiting the site and wishing to travel west on Case Grande Road have the opportunity to make U-turns at
the Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout. Residents and guests arriving from the east would be required
to make a U-turn from the two-way left -turn lane (TWLT) which is located opposite Casa Grande High
School to enter the site. This number is expected to be minor and residents and guests will likely shift to
other more convenient routes.
Parking
The PEP Housing project identifies a parking lot that provides 32 standard vehicle spaces, 9 compact vehicle
spaces and three handicap parking spaces, all uncovered.
A search of the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance Section 20-300, parking requirements was made for
the project. Currently the City of Petaluma Zoning Code does not define parking standards for senior
housing complexes. A search of parking standards from other California communities was made, The
County of Monterey has a definition and standard for Senior Housing Complexes with a parking
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December 1, 2004 Page 10 w -trans
Distribution
Vehicle Trip Ends Generated
Route
(Percent)
Daily A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Ely Blvd (north of Casa Grande)
16
33 1 1
Ely Blvd (south of Casa Grande)
12
25 1 1
Casa Grande Rd (east of Ely)
12
25 1 1
McDowell Blvd (north of Casa Grande)
20
42 1 1
McDowell Blvd (south of Casa Grande)
10
21 — I
Casa Grande Rd (west of McDowell)
30
63 1 2
TOTAL TRIPS
100 Percent (
209 5 7
= value less than I
Existing plus Project Conditions
The Existing plus Project Conditions Scenario provides the results of the evaluation of the potential traffic
impacts which are expected to occur during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with the addition of traffic from
the proposed PEP Housing project to the existing traffic levels. The resulting project added traffic volumes
are shown in Figure 1. As seen in Table 2 the expected operating conditions for all study intersections will
remain well within acceptable standards.
Site Access and Internal Circulation
The project plan identifies a single access connecting to Casa Grande Road. The access drivewaywill extend
to the southeast to a circular turn -a -round and drop off area. The access driveway will be limited to right
turns in and out onto Casa Grande Road by the existing landscaped median island. Residents and guests
exiting the site and wishing to travel west on Case Grande Road have the opportunity to make U-turns at
the Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard roundabout. Residents and guests arriving from the east would be required
to make a U-turn from the two-way left -turn lane (TWLT) which is located opposite Casa Grande High
School to enter the site. This number is expected to be minor and residents and guests will likely shift to
other more convenient routes.
Parking
The PEP Housing project identifies a parking lot that provides 32 standard vehicle spaces, 9 compact vehicle
spaces and three handicap parking spaces, all uncovered.
A search of the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance Section 20-300, parking requirements was made for
the project. Currently the City of Petaluma Zoning Code does not define parking standards for senior
housing complexes. A search of parking standards from other California communities was made, The
County of Monterey has a definition and standard for Senior Housing Complexes with a parking
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December 1, 2004 Page 10 w -trans
requirement of one space for each two dwelling units plus one guest space for every eight dwelling units.
Using this standard, a 60 -unit senior housing development would need 38 off-street parking spaces. The
on-site parking identified exceeds the alternative standard and is considered reasonable. The off-street
parking criteria is summarized in Table 5.
Table 5
Parking Demand
Land Use Variable Rate Parking
Residential 60 Senior I / 2 du 30
dwelling units
+Guest I / 8 du
TOTAL 38
The City of Petaluma should consider a variance from the City Parking Code for Senior Housing Units.
Alternative Transportation Modes
Transit
A small portion of the trips to the site would be via public transit. The existing route provided by Petaluma
Transit on Casa Grande Road adjacent to the project site is expected to be adequate to serve the potential
demand.
Bicycle
Project frontage improvements to Casa Grande Road will need to accommodate the existing bicycle lanes
to ensure they are retained.
Pedestrians
Pedestrian walkways are proposed on the westerly side of the project street and on the project frontage
of Casa Grande Road where pedestrian activity is anticipated. There will remain gaps in the pedestrian
circulation network until all properties along Casa Grande Road are developed and sidewalks installed,
completing the system in the study area. To encourage pedestrian activity sidewalks on both sides of the
project access driveway are recommended.
Future Conditions
The City of Petaluma has developed a Traffic Model for use in evaluating the potential traffic impacts of
buildout of the land uses described in the current General Plan together with new or improved streets. The
model is an electronic simulation of streets and roads, called links, and sub areas of the City, called Traffic
Analysis Zones (TAZ). The links represent the street system and have values indicating capacity, travel
speed, distance and lanes while TAZ's have values for various land use categories such as housing,
commercial and industrial uses. The model uses an iterative process to assign trips originating in one zone
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma ��`
December I, 2004 Page I I w -trap
W/
,
to likely destination zones based upon home -to -work, shopping and work related trips. The accumulation
of trips from each zone provides the anticipated traffic demand for each link in the system. The PET housing
project site is located within TAZ 414 of the City's Traffic Model. The General Plan land use designation
of Urban Standard would permit I I single family dwellings to be constructed. The trip generation potential
of I I single family homes is 105 daily trips, including 8 during the a.m. peal( hour and I I during the p.m. peal(
hour. Although the daily trip generation of the proposed PEP Housing project exceeds that of the General
Plan Land Use designation, the a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip counts are lower. As the City of Petaluma uses
the p.m. peal( hour for the determination of traffic impacts the PEP Housing project for seniors will have
fewer p.m. peak hour trips and less of an impact to the area circulation system than if the site were
developed under the existing General Plan Land Use designation.
Using the traffic volumes from the model for the year 2020, future traffic volumes at the study intersections
were estimated using the 'Furness' method. This method is an iterative process that employs existing turn
movement data, existing link volumes and future link volumes to project likely traffic volumes at
intersections. Using these techniques the future 2020 p.m. peak hour turn movements were developed for
the study intersections. Figure I shows these projected p.m. peal( hour traffic volumes.
The study intersection of Casa Grande Road/Ely Boulevard is expected to continue operating acceptably
at LOS C or better under the assumed future 20 -year horizon volumes. The intersection of McDowell
Boulevard/Casa Grande Road is expected to operate at LOS F under the existing all -way stop controls. The
intersection of McDowell Boulevard South/Casa Grande Road is included within the list of intersections to
be signalized. With signalization the operational performance will improve to LOS C with 24.3 seconds of
average delay. The single lane roundabout considered as a short-term improvement is projected to operate
at LOS F under the anticipated Future traffic volumes, so does not appear to be an appropriate long-term
solution for this location. A summary of the Level of Service calculations is provided in Table 6 and copies
of the calculations are provided in Appendix A.
Table 6
Summary of Future PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of
Service Calculations
Intersection
Casa Grande Rd/McDowell
Roundabout Controlled
Signal Controlled
Casa Grande Rd/Ely
Future
r
r
r
Delay
LOS
231.4
F
r
122.5
F
24.3
C
r
11.7
B
Notes: Delay is in average number of seconds per vehicle
LOS = Level of Service
Italics = Mitigated Conditions
Trof is Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page 12
w -trans
r
I
�3 1
Future plus Project Conditions
The proposed project is expected to generate four fewer p.m. peak hour trips than would have been
assumed for buildout of this site under the existing land use designation. The potential impact of such a
relatively small reduction in the number of trips at an intersection is expected to be a minor incremental
benefit.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page 13 vv-tran)»� 14—
Conclusions and Recommendations
Both existing study intersections are currently operating acceptably at LOS C or better.
• Assuming up to 60 dwelling units, the project would be expected to generate an average of 209 new
daily vehicle trips, which includes 5 a.m. peak hour trips and 7 p.m. peak hour trips.
The addition of project trips will result in a less than significant impact as all study intersections will
continue to operate at LOS C or better.
First time visitors to the site should be directed through the intersection of Casa Grande Road/
McDowell Boulevard to reduce the need to make U-turns on Casa Grande Road.
Existing transit and pedestrian facilities are adequate to meet the project's demand.
The General Plan land use designation of Urban Standard would permit construction of I I single family
dwellings. The trip generation potential of I I single family homes is 105 daily trips, of which 8 would
occur during the a.m. peak hour and I I during the p.m. peak hour. Although the daily trip generation
of the proposed PEP Housing project exceeds that associated with the General Plan Land Use
designation, fewer trips would be generated during the critical a.m. and p.m. peak hours. As the City
of Petaluma uses the p.m. peak hour for the determination of traffic impacts, with fewer p.m. peak hour
trips the PEP Housing project for seniors will have less of an impact to the area circulation system than
if the site were developed under the existing General Plan Land Use designation.
Operation of the intersection of McDowell Boulevard South/Casa Grande Road is projected to
deteriorate to LOS F conditions based on Future year 2020 traffic projections from the City's Traffic
Model. The model estimates that p.m. peak hour traffic volumes would increase from its current level
of 1,541 vehicles to 3,346 vehicles by 2020. This level of increase represents a 117 percent increase in
traffic, or approximately a 5 percent per year increase over the next 16 years. The project would be
expected to increase p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection by only two vehicles. Therefore,
the project's contribution to projected traffic increase is only 0.1 1 percent. This level of increase should
be considered negligible. Therefore, the project should not be expected to contribute towards future
mitigation a the intersection of McDowell Boulevard South/Casa Grande Road.
• The Future 2020 traffic projections indicate that the existing all -way stop control and a single -lane
roundabout, similar to Casa Grande/Ely Boulevard, would be expected to operate with LOS F
conditions. Signalization will be necessary to accommodate the projected traffic volumes at build -out
as generated by the General Plan Traffic Model. Therefore, the City should track conditions at this
intersection to determine the appropriate mitigation as the need becomes more evident in the future.
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page 14
i
I
I
I
I
I■
i
r�
Study Participants and References
Study Participants
Project Engineer: Allan Tilton, RE
Graphics:
Debbie Dunn
Technician:
Debbie Dunn
Report Review:
Dalene Whitlock, P.E., PTOE
Data Collection:
Scott Rhodes
Reference=_
Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000
Highway Design Manual, California Department of Transportation
Trip Generation, 7" Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003
City of Petaluma General Plan
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance
PET 106
Traffic Impact Study for PEP Casa Grande in the City of Petaluma
December I, 2004 Page 15
w-tranj;'//
4
USS North Redwood Drive
Suite 110
San Rafael, California 9-903
F 1> 101-1831
T qli/q91-1338
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
May 17, 2004
Project 1111.01
Prepared For.
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties
1400 Caulfield Lane
Petaluma, California 95954
CERTIFICATION
This document is an instrument of service, prepared by or under the direction of the undersigned professionals, In accordance with the
current ordinary standard of care. The service specifically excludes the investigation of recon, asbestos or other hazardous materials.
The document is for the sole use of the client and consultants on this project. No other use is authorized. If the project changes, or more
than two years have passed since issuance of this report, the findings and recommendations must be reviewed by the undersigned.
MILLER PACIFIC ENGINEERING GROUP
(a Calit2KWaorporation)
No. C 058622
* ExP.12/31/06
;I 'im6'fhy J. Re,
Civil Engineer
(Expires 12/3'.
REVIEWED BY:
2398
= Exp.6l301
cF07'ECt`IVV0 ,e
F C Ali
Scott A. Stephens
Tical Engineer 2398
(Expires 6/30/05)
M
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
Page 1
A. Purpose and Scope of Services
1
B. Project Description
2
if. SITE CONDITIONS
3
A. Regional Geology
3
B. Seismicity
3
C. Surface Conditions
5
D. Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing
5
E. Groundwater
6
III. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
7
A. Summary
7
B. Fault Surface Rupture
7
C. Seismic Shaking
7
D. Liquefaction Potential
8
E. Seismic Induced Ground Settlement
9
F. Lurching and Ground Cracking
10
G. Erosion
10
H. Seiche and Tsunami
10
I. Flooding
11
J. Expansive Soil
11
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
12
A. Conclusions
12
B. Expansive Soil
12
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
14
A. General
14
B. Site Preparation and Grading
14
C. Seismic Design
16
D. Foundation Design
17
E. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade18
18
F. Underground Utilities
19
G. Site Drainage Considerations
19
H. Pavement Design
20
I. Wintertime Construction
20
VI. SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES
22
LIST OF REFERENCES
23
11
DISTRIBUTION 24
FIGURES
Site Location Map Figure 1
Site Plan 2
Active Fault Map 3
APPENDIX A — SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Soil Classification Chart Figure A-1
Boring Logs A-2 to A-7
Plasticity Chart A-8
I1
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
I. 117TRODUCTION
A. ElirnnSa and Ronna of Rarvinpc
This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Investigation for a planned multi -unit
residential development at 400 Casa Grande Road in Petaluma, California. The approximately
250 foot by 400 foot parcel is located southeast of Casa Grande Road, approximately 300 feet
southwest of its intersection with Ely Boulevard, in Petaluma California. The project site location is
shown on Figures 1 & 2.
The purpose of our services is to investigate site subsurface conditions, evaluate geologic
hazards, and develop geotechnical criteria and recommendations for the use in the planning
design and construction planned new development.
Our scope, as presented in our proposal letter dated January 7, 2004, includes three phases.
This report completes our Phase 1 Geotechnical Investigation and Report services, which include
the following:
Exploration of subsurface soil conditions with 6 borings;
Laboratory testing of selected soil samples to determine pertinent engineering
properties;
Engineering analysis of our field and laboratory findings and;
A summary of our findings, conclusions, and design -level recommendations in this
written report.
Our Phase 2 services will include Post -Report Consultation and Plan Review and Phase 3 will be
our Geotechnical Services during Construction.
1
IOD
B. Prniant nasnriptinn
The project site is a roughly rectangular parcel bounded by Casa Grande Road on the northwest,
existing residential developments on the northeast and southwest, and Adobe Creek on the
southeast.
Project details have not yet been finalized. However, we understand that development will include
several new multi -unit, two- or three-story buildings to be used for low-income housing, with
associated utilities, driveways, and parking areas. New buildings will be of wood frame
construction with either raised -wood or concrete slab -on -grade floors. The site is relatively flat.
Therefore, only relatively minor grading (cuts and/or fills on the order of three feet or less) is
anticipated to provide adequate surface drainage and to create the level building pads. Retaining
walls in excess of three feet retained height are not likely. Other likely improvements include
exterior concrete flatwork and asphalt paved driveways and parking areas. CoGenesis Design
Group of Petaluma, California is the project Architect.
2
10(
II. SITF CnNnITION$
-....[ei8*9
r-
Olaffl1NG�AgpP '>
Sonoma County is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of California.
Northwest -southeast trending mountain ridges and intervening valleys that were formed from
tectonic activity between the Pacific and North American Plates characterize this area. Tectonic
activity within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province is concentrated along the San Andreas
Fault Zone.
Geologic mapping of the area by the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG)' indicates
that the project site is underlain by older alluvial fan and fluvial deposits consisting mainly of
interbedded fine sands, silts, and silty clays. The mapping further indicates that rock of the
Petaluma formation is present at significant depth beneath the fan deposits. Near surface soil in
this area is known locally as "Adobe" clay and is commonly highly expansive in nature.
1. Active E alts in tha Reoinn. The site is located within the seismically active San Francisco
Bay Region and will therefore experience the effects of future earthquakes. Such earthquakes
could occur on any of several active faults within the region. The CDMG (1998) has mapped
various active and inactive faults in the region. Active faults are defined as those that show
evidence of movement in the past 11,000 years (i.e. Holocene) and have reported average
slip rates greater than 0.1 mm per year. These faults, defined as either UBC Source Type "A"
or "B," are shown on the attached Active Fault Map, Figure 3.
"Geology For Planning in Sonoma County", 1980, Special Report 120.
3
Ivy
2. Historic Fault Activity. Numerous earthquakes have occurred in the region within historic
times. The results of our computer database search indicate that 29 earthquakes (Richter
Magnitude 5.0 or larger) have occurred within 100 kilometers of the site area between 1836 and
2004. Using empirical attenuation relationships, the maximum historic acceleration (median peak)
at the project site is approximately 0.15g. The five most significant historic earthquakes to affect
the project site are summarized in Table A.
TABLE A
SIGNIFICANT EARTHQUAKE ACTIVITY
400 CASA GRANDE RAOD
PEIALUMA. CALIFORNIA
Historic
Richter Maximum Peak
Fault Mag itn tido Year Distance Acceleration
Rodgers Creek
6.2
1898
17 km
0.15 g
San Andreas
8.2
1906
60 km
0.13 g
Rodgers Creek
5.5
1891
17 km
0.05 g
Rodgers Creek
5.7
1969
25 km
0.07 g
West Napa
5.2
2000
21 km
0.05 g
References: Sources: USGS (2001), Abrahamson Silva (1997)
The calculated accelerations should only be considered as reasonable estimates. Many
factors (soil conditions, orientation to the fault, etc.) can influence the actual ground surface
accelerations. Significant deviations from the values presented are possible due to
geotechnical and geologic variations from the typical conditions used in the empirical
correlations.
3. Prn ahility of Piiture Earthquake . The historical records do not directly indicate either the
maximum credible earthquake or the probability of such a future event. To evaluate
earthquake probability in this region, the USGS has assembled a group of researchers into the
"Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities" to estimate the probabilities of
0
103
earthquakes on active faults. Potential sources were analyzed considering fault geometry,
geologic slip rates, geodetic strain rates, historic activity, and micro -seismicity, to arrive at
estimates of probabilities of earthquakes with a Moment Magnitude greater than 6.7 by 2030.
The probability studies focus on seven "fault systems" within the Bay Area. Fault systems are
composed of different, interacting fault segments capable of producing earthquakes within the
individual segment or in combination with other segments of the same fault system. The
probabilities for the individual fault segments in the San Francisco Bay Area are presented in
Figure 3.
In addition to the seven fault systems, the studies included probabilities of "background
earthquakes." These earthquakes are not associated with the identified fault systems and
may occur on lesser faults (i.e., West Napa) or previously unknown faults (i.e., the 1989 Loma
Prieta and 1994 Northridge earthquakes). When the probabilities on all seven fault systems
and the background earthquakes are combined mathematically, there is a 70 percent chance
for a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake to occur in the Bay Area by the year 2030. Smaller
earthquakes (between magnitudes 6.0 and 6.7), capable of considerable damage depending
on proximity to urban areas, have about an 80 percent chance of occurring in the Bay Area by
2030 (USGS, 1999).
Additional studies by the USGS regarding the probability of large earthquakes in the Bay Area
are on going. These current evaluations include data from additional active faults and
updated geological data.
The parcel is undeveloped and relatively flat. It has a modest vegetative cover consisting of low
grass and weeds. At the time of our investigation, the site was used for sheep grazing. No
improvements, other than a small wooden structure used for selling produce and a wire fence that
parallels to Casa Grande approximately 1/2 into the property, are known to exist on the site.
D. 5ut25urfara Fxnlnrptinn anri I ahnratnry TPsthg
We explored subsurface conditions with six borings drilled at the site on March 2, 2004, using
5
track -mounted auger drilling equipment. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Site
Plan, Figure 2. The soils encountered were logged and representative samples were collected,
sealed to minimize moisture loss, and transported to our laboratory for testing. The subsurface
exploration and laboratory testing programs are discussed in more detail in Appendix A.
Our subsurface exploration generally confirms the mapped local geologic conditions. The near -
surface soil at the site consists of approximately four to five feet of high plasticity silty clay (Adobe)
over interbeded layers of silt, clay, sand, and gravel. Our past experience and current laboratory
testing indicate that the Adobe clay is highly plastic and potentially expansive (will undergo large
volume changes with seasonal changes in moisture content). This condition will require mitigation
prior to being suitable for support of lightly loaded structures and pavements. Below the Adobe
clay, the alluvial soil becomes increasingly more granular, lighter colored, less plastic, and
relatively stiff/dense with depth.
E. Grni mdwetPr
Standing water was observed at between four and ten feet below ground surface within three
hours of drilling the borings. Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate seasonally and may be
nearer to the ground surface during periods of intense rainfall or for a period of time after
significant rainfall.
LI
0,15
III. rF-nl r)rIC HA7ARDS
A. Summary
We evaluated potential geologic hazards that could affect the site and their significant adverse
impacts on structures for human occupancy. The principle geologic hazards associated with the
planned development of this site are strong seismic ground shaking, near -surface expansive soils,
and lurching/cracking along the 'top of the bank for Adobe Creek southeast of the site. Depending
on the time of year, groundwater may also be encountered during construction in utility trench
excavations deeper than four to five feet. We judge that other geologic hazards are of minor
concern. The various geologic hazards, their potential impacts and mitigation measures are
described below.
B. f aLdt Surface Runture
Under the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, the California Division of Mines and Geology
(CDMG) produced 1:24,000 scale maps showing all known active faults and defining zones within
which special fault studies are required. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone. The potential for fault surface rupture at the site is therefore remote.
No mitigation measures are required.
C. Saigmir RhpAbg
The site will likely experience seismic ground shaking similar to other areas in the seismically
active San Francisco Bay Area. Earthquakes along several active faults in the region, as shown
on Figure 3, could cause moderate to strong ground shaking at the site. The intensity of
earthquake motion will depend on the characteristics of the generating fault, distance to the fault
and rupture zone, earthquake magnitude, earthquake duration, and site-specific geologic
conditions. Relatively deep soil deposits underlie the site and were generally found to be relatively
stiff/dense. Empirical relations developed for stiff soil sites (Boore, Joyner and Fumal, 1994)
provide approximate estimates of median peak ground accelerations. A summary of the principal
active faults affecting the site, their closest distance to the development area, moment magnitude
of characteristic earthquake and probable peak around accelerations which a quake on the fault
could aenerate at the site are shown in Table B.
TABLE B
ESTIMATED PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION
FOR PRINCIPAL ACTIVE FAULTS
400 CASA GRANDE RAOD
PETALUMA, GAI IFORNIA
(1) Determined from attenuation relationship by Boore, Joyner, Fumal (1994) for Stiff soil sites
Reference: USGS (1996)
The potential for strong seismic shaking at the project site is high. Due to its close proximity, the
Rodgers Creek fault presents the highest potential for severe ground shaking. The significant
adverse impact associated with strong seismic shaking is potential damage to structures and
improvements.
Seismic Shaking Mitigation Measures - Mitigation measures should include designing the
improvements and structures in accordance with the most recent (2001) version of the California
Building Code. Recommended BC seismic coefficients are provided in Section V -C of this report.
D. I irniefactinn Pntantial
Liquefaction refers to the sudden, temporary loss of soil shear strength during strong ground
shaking. Liquefaction -related phenomena include liquefaction -induced settlement, flow failure,
and lateral spreading. These phenomena can occur where there are saturated, loose, granular
deposits.
To evaluate soil liquefaction, the seismic energy from an earthquake is compared with the ability
of the soil to resist pore pressure generation. The earthquake energy is termed the cyclic stress
W
°I
Moment Magnitude
Closest Estimated
Median
for Characteristic
Distance
Peak Ground
EXWR
Earthquake
(kilnmatarG)
Acceleration (q)h'
Rodgers Creek
7.1
5
0.45
San Andreas
7.9
24
0.26
Hayward North
6.7
23
0.15
West Napa
6.5
24
0.13
(1) Determined from attenuation relationship by Boore, Joyner, Fumal (1994) for Stiff soil sites
Reference: USGS (1996)
The potential for strong seismic shaking at the project site is high. Due to its close proximity, the
Rodgers Creek fault presents the highest potential for severe ground shaking. The significant
adverse impact associated with strong seismic shaking is potential damage to structures and
improvements.
Seismic Shaking Mitigation Measures - Mitigation measures should include designing the
improvements and structures in accordance with the most recent (2001) version of the California
Building Code. Recommended BC seismic coefficients are provided in Section V -C of this report.
D. I irniefactinn Pntantial
Liquefaction refers to the sudden, temporary loss of soil shear strength during strong ground
shaking. Liquefaction -related phenomena include liquefaction -induced settlement, flow failure,
and lateral spreading. These phenomena can occur where there are saturated, loose, granular
deposits.
To evaluate soil liquefaction, the seismic energy from an earthquake is compared with the ability
of the soil to resist pore pressure generation. The earthquake energy is termed the cyclic stress
W
°I
ratio (CSR) and is a function of the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and depth. The soil
resistance is based on the relative density and percent silt and clay of the soil. The relative
density of cohesionless soil is correlated with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count data
(N,)6G measured during exploration and percent fines determined from laboratory testing.
Near surface soil at the site consists of Adobe clay, a stiff, high plasticity, fine-grained material not
susceptible to liquefaction. The alluvial soil beneath the Adobe varies in grain size distribution
with depth. Generally, the soil encountered had fine contents in excess of 20 percent. In addition,
the densities of all samples (based on Corrected Blow Counts) were relatively high. Based on our
field exploration and laboratory testing, we conclude that liquefaction potential at the site is not
significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required other than conventional building pad
preparation.
No mitigation measures are required
E. :;aismic Inriiir.Pd Ground SPttlPmant
Seismic ground shaking can induce settlement of unsaturated, loose, granular soils. Even if not
saturated, relatively loose alluvial deposits and granular fill encountered in our borings could be
susceptible to seismic induced ground settlement. The potential hazard associated with Seismic
Induced Ground Settlement is considered to be low.
Seismic Induced Ground Settlement Mitigation Measures — Design foundations in accordance
with recommendations in Section V -D of this report.
0
M,
F. I urnhingand Gmund Cracking
Lurching and associated ground cracking can occur during strong ground shaking. The ground
cracking generally occurs along the tops of slopes where stiff soils are underlain by soft deposits
or along steep slopes or channel banks. Adobe Creek runs adjacent to the southeastern property
boundary. Therefore, Lurching and ground cracking could be a hazard to structures located too
close to the creek channel.
Lurching and Ground Cracking Mitigation Measures— We recommend a minimum 20 -foot setback
from the top of the Adobe Creek bank for all new structures
G. Erosion
Severe erosion typically occurs on moderate slopes of sand and steep slopes of clay subjected to
concentrated water runoff. These topographic conditions do not exist at the site. Thus, the
surface conditions are not highly susceptible to erosion.
No special mitigation measures are required - The project Civil Engineer should design the site
drainage to collect surface water into a storm drain system and discharge water at an appropriate
location. Re-establishing vegetation on disturbed areas will also be required to minimize erosion.
Erosion control measures during and after construction should conform to the most recent version
of the Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual (California, 2002).
H. Sainhe and Tsunami
Seiche and tsunamis are short duration earthquake -generated water waves in large enclosed
bodies of water and the open ocean, respectively. The extent and severity of a Seiche would be
dependent upon ground motions and fault offset from nearby active faults. The site is not located
adjacent to the ocean or near to significant bodies of water. Therefore, the potential hazard from
Seiche and tsunami is considered to be insignificant.
No mitigation measures are required
10
101
1. Flnodinn
The site is located adjacent to the Adobe Creek. Based on review of FEMA flood hazard maps,
some areas of the property directly adjacent to Adobe Creek may be within the 100 -year flood
zone. However, the vast majority of the property is not within the 100 -year flood zone. Detailed
evaluation of the flooding potential at the site and design of appropriate flood control and drainage
improvements should be provided by the project Civil Engineer.
Flooding Mitigation Measures — Design of surface drainage facilities for the project is normally
conducted by the project Civil Engineer. Geotechnical recommendations for site drainage are
provided in Section V -G.
J. Fxransiva Rnil
Expansive soil occurs when clay particles interact with water causing volume changes in the clay
soil. The clay soil may swell when saturated and shrink when dried. This phenomenon generally
decreases in magnitude with increasing confinement pressure at depth. These volume changes
may damage lightly loaded foundations, flatwork, and pavement.
Our past experience and current Atterberg Limits (plasticity) testing indicates that near surface
alluvial soil (Adobe) is highly plastic with a high expansion potential. Potential for distress from
expansive soil shrink/swell is high.
Expansive Soil Mitigation Measures - Expansive soils can be effectively mitigated by several
commonly employed design and construction methods. We discuss those design options in detail
in the following Conclusion and Discussion Section IV. Follow site grading, drainage, and
foundation design recommendations in section V of this report.
11
11D
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Based on our current investigation and previous experience with similar sites and projects, we
conclude that the site is suitable for the planned residential development. New buildings can be
safely supported on either a drilled pier and grade beam foundation system or on more
conventional spread footings provided that the pads are properly prepared to mitigate the
expansive soil conditions. The primary geotechnical concerns relative to site development are
near -surface expansive soil and appropriate foundation design to resist strong seismic ground
shaking. Site expansive soil conditions are discussed in more detail below. Design
recommendations for these and other geotechnical issues are provided in the following
Recommendations Section.
B. Expansive Soil
Approximately four to five feet of highly expansive "Adobe' clay blanket the site. Expansive soil
tends to swell (heave) and shrink when they are alternately wetted and dried, respectively. This
shrink/swell cycle can be very damaging to structures founded in expansive clay soil. Distress
from expansive soil movement can include cracking of brittle wall coverings (stucco, plaster,
drywall, etc.), wracked door and/or window frames, and uneven floors and cracked slabs.
Flatwork, pavements, and concrete slabs -on -grade are particularly vulnerable to distress.
For new structures, two basic options are commonly employed to mitigate expansive near -surface
soil:
1) Improvement of the near -surface expansive soils by either addition of lime or cement
(Treatment), or replacement with non -expansive import fill (Select Fill); or,
2) Use of drilled pier and grade beam foundation systems to gain foundation support for new
structures below the unstable near -surface expansive soils.
Based on our understanding of site conditions and planned development, we judge that improving
the near -surface expansive soil by means of Select Fill or Treatment will provide more value to the
project than using drilled pier foundations for the following reasons:
12
� '=€iJG1�1EEA1N�i-GBO�1P -,:
Improved near -surface soil (either Select Fill or Treated on-site clays) will allow for the use
of more conventional, and less costly, shallow spread footings instead of drilled piers;
Improving the near surface expansive soil will provide a much improved pavement
subgrade condition (higher R -value) which will allow a reduced pavement section.
Depending in the total area of pavement for driveways and parking areas, this could result
in significant cost savings to the project. For comparison purposes, we provide pavement
structural sections for various traffic loading conditions (TI) for both improved subgrade
and the un -improved native Adobe soils in Section V -H.
If construction is performed from late fall to mid spring, wet soil conditions from seasonal
rains are likely. Wet soil conditions can make site preparation and grading difficult or
impossible. Treatment with lime not only mitigates expansive potential of near -surface
soils, but also can mitigate wet soil conditions and allow construction to proceed through
the wet season, providing added flexibility to the construction schedule.
Depending on the final Civil design, some import fill may be required to raise building pads
for drainage or other civil reasons. If this is the case, it could make the Select Fill
improvement option more cost effective.
13
119
IMEZWiZi7u u R AN116I M
A. General
As discussed earlier, we judge that new buildings can be safely supported on shallow spread
footings provided that the pads are properly prepared to mitigate the expansive near surface
Adobe soil conditions. Design recommendations are provided below.
E. Site Preparation and Grading
Site preparation should include scraping the existing grass, weeds, and their root crowns from the
ground surface. We estimate that this removal depth will vary between two and four inches. The
material removed from the surface will not be suitable for use as structural fill and should be
removed from the site or stockpiled for use in landscape areas.
For the purpose of definition, "Treatment or Select Fill areas" referred to in the remainder of this
report are:
1) To a depth of 30 inches below planned subgrade within building pad areas and for a distance
of at least five feet beyond outside edges of perimeter footings; and
2) To a depth of 18 inches below planned subgrade within exterior concrete slab and pavement
areas and for a distance of at least three feet beyond their edges.
For Treatment, five percent by weight of high calcium or dolomitic quicklime should be added to
the soil either dry or in a hydrated slurry, and then be thoroughly mixed, moisture conditioned as
required, and compacted to the degree of compaction specified below. The depth of mixing and
compaction usually varies from 12 to 18 inches depending on the equipment used. Select Fill, if
used, must have a Liquid Limit of less than 40 and a Plasticity Index less than 20 and should
conform to the criteria in Table C.
14
ID
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT
PETAL UMA, CALIFORNIA
December 16, 2004
Prepared for:
Paula Cook
Petaluma Ecumenical Properties
Prepared by:
Dana M. Lodico
Richard Rodkin, PE
ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC.
Acoustics -Air Quality
505 Petaluma Boulevard South
Petaluma, CA 94952
(707)766-7700
Job
114—
Introduction
This report presents the results of the noise assessment conducted for the proposed residential
development at 400 Casa Grande Road in Petaluma, California. The Setting Section of the report presents
the fundamentals of environmental noise, provides a discussion of policies and standards applicable to the
project, and presents the results of a noise monitoring survey conducted at the site. The Impacts and
Mitigation Measures Section provides an evaluation of the potential for noise impacts resulting from the
project and presents mitigation measures for all identified significant impacts.
Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Acoustics
Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or
annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch is the
height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the vibrations by
which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds with a lower pitch.
Loudness is amplitude of sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the ear. Amplitude
may be compared with the height of an ocean wave.
In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales which are
used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates
the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that
the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic
basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten -fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is
100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the
subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its level. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is
perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical
terms are defined in Table 1.
There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A -weighted
sound level or dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is
most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA are shown in Table 2.
Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the
average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most
commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical
energy as the summation of all the time -varying events. This energy -equivalent sound/noise descriptor is
called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events
of arbitrary duration.
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can
accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer
models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The
accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from the noise source. Close
to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA.
Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise
interferes with the ability to sleep — 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial
noise penalties added to quiet -time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent
Level, CNEL„ is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added
to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm - 7:00 am) noise levels.
The Day/Night Average Sowed Level, Ld,,, is essentially the same as CNEL, with the exception that the
evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour period are grouped into the
daytime period.
Table 1 Definitions of Acoustical Terms Used in this Report
Term
nefmitions
Decibel, dB
A unit describing, the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base
Loi, Lin, Lso, L90
10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The
tll
reference pressure for air is 20.
Sound Pressure Level
Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro Pascals
or DNL
(or 20 micro Newtons per square meter), where I Pascal is the pressure resulting
Community Noise
from a force of I Newton exerted over an area of I square meter. The sound
Equivalent Level, CNEL
pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the
ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g.,
Ambient Noise Level
20 micro Pascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a
sound level meter.
Frequency, Hz
The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below
atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000117_
Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.
A -Weighted Sound Level,
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the
dBA
A -weighting filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and
very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency
response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.
Equivalent Noise Level, Leq The average A -weighted noise level during the measurement period
Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given
location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration,
frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the
prevailing ambient noise level.
"�
The maximum and minimum A -weighted noise level during the measurement
period.
Loi, Lin, Lso, L90
The A -weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time
I
during the measurement period.
Dayttdight Noise Level, Ld,
The average A -weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition
or DNL
of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.
Community Noise
The average A -weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition
Equivalent Level, CNEL
of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10
decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.
Ambient Noise Level
The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level
of environmental noise at a given location.
Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given
location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration,
frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the
prevailing ambient noise level.
"�
Table 2 Typical Noise Levels in the Environment
INoise Level I
Common Outdoor Noise Source (dBA) Common Indoor Noise Source
120 dBA
Jet fly -over at 300 meters
Pile driver at 20 meters
Large truck pass by at 15 meters
Gas lawn mower at 30 meters
Commercial/Urban area daytime
Suburban expressway at 90 meters
Suburban daytime
Urban area nighttime
Suburban nighttime
Quiet rural areas
Wilderness area
Threshold of human hearing
Rock concert
110 dBA
l�
Night club with live music
80 dBA Noisy restaurant
Garbage disposal at I meter
70 dBA Vacuum cleaner at 3 meters
Normal speech at I meter
60 dBA
Active office environment
50 dBA
Quiet office environment
40 dBA
30 dBA Library
Quiet bedroom at night
20 dBA
10 dBA
0dBA Threshold of human hearing
4
uT
Regulatory and Significance Criteria
Regulatory criteria that would be applicable to the proposed project would include guidelines, goals,
policies, and standards established by the State of California and the City of Petaluma. The City of
Petaluma has established quantifiable noise levels deemed acceptable for a specified land use. The State
CEQA guidelines pose questions to assist decision -makers in assessing the potential for significant
impacts resulting from planned projects. A summary of the regulatory criteria applicable to the proposed
project is presented below.
State CEOA Guidelines
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) contains guidelines to evaluate the significance of
effects of environmental noise attributable to a proposed project. CEQA asks whether the proposed
project would result in:
• Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
CEQA does not define what noise level increase would be considered substantial. Typically, project -
generated noise level increases of 3 dBA L•, or greater at a noise sensitive use would be considered
significant where exterior noise levels would exceed the normally acceptable noise level standard (e.g., 60
dBA Ldp). Where noise levels would remain at or below the normally acceptable noise level standard, noise
level increases of 5 dBA Ldn or greater would be considered significant -
California State Building Code
Environmental noise intrusion into new multi -family housing is regulated by Appendix Chapter 12,
Section 1208, Sound Transmission Control in the 1998 California Building Code. Interior noise levels
attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA L& in any habitable room. Multi -family
residential proposed in noise environments exceeding 60 dBA Ldo require an acoustical analysis showing
that the proposed design will limit exterior noise to the prescribed allowable interior level.
Citv of Petaluma General Plan
Within the City of Petaluma's Community Health and Safety Element are objectives and policies
applicable to the proposed multi -family residential project. The City's objective is to, "...minimize the
amount of noise that future development creates and the amount of noise to which the community is
exposed." The following policies support the City's goal.
Policy 25: Strictly enforce local noise standards.
Policy 26: The overlapping noise levels for acceptability in Figure 11-1 shall be interpreted to
require application of the quieter standard unless it can be shown that the circumstances
of the project allow for a less conservative interpretation based on the specific type of
use, the benefits of the project, and the ability to mitigate noise impacts.
H
Policy 27: Require sound buffers (particularly landscaped buffers), open space, or other mitigation
measures between residential areas producing higher noise levels, such as freeways,
commercial sites, and industrial developments to achieve the sound level reduction
necessary to produce noise -compatible land uses.
Figure 11-1 in the Petaluma General Plan, Land UsetNoise Compatibility Standards, indicates that multi-
family residential land uses are considered normally acceptable in noise environments of 60 dBA L& or
less. Noise environments ranging from 60 dBA Lao to 70 dBA Ld, are considered conditionally
acceptable for multi -family residential land uses. Between 70 dBA L& to 75 dBA Ldn, multi -family
residential land uses would be considered normally unacceptable. In noise environments exceeding 75
dBA L&„ these land uses would be considered clearly unacceptable.
Existing Noise Environment
The project site is located east of Casa Grande High School, along the eastern side of Casa Grande Road.
A site visit was conducted on December 10, 2004. The site is bordered by residential land uses,
agricultural land uses (with livestock, including sheep and chickens), and Casa Grande High School. The
noise environment at the site results primarily from traffic noise generated along Casa Grande Road.
Intermittent noisy activities associated with Casa Grande High School (athletics, social activities, school
bells) may be audible at times, but would not significantly effect the overall noise environment. A
previous noise monitoring survey was conducted from September 29, 2004 to September 30, 2004 for a
nearby project. The noise monitoring survey included one long-term measurement along Casa Grande
Road to establish the noise exposure along this roadway. The noise measurement location is shown on
Figure 1.
Figure I: Noise Measurement Locations
Long-term noise measurement location LT -1 was located southwest of the project site (near Casa Grande
High School), approximately 45 feet from the centerline of Casa Grande Road. Hourly Leq noise levels
ranged from about 67 dBA to 72 dBA during daytime hours and dropped to 53 dBA at night. The
calculated day -night average noise level was 70 dBA La (See Figure 2).
Figure 2: Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT -2
Noise Levels at LT -1
—45 reef from the Centerline orCasa Gmnde Road
September 29-30,2M4
M' k
tmt=mm+¢
Z
-¢�
� lI
ISM IM 1710 11O 1890 A.W Z. 22m IM 0. 1W 2W ]W tW SW 89p lW OW M MW I1W 12% I3W 1100
Hour ftinniM
NOISE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Criteria
Impact I: Noise and Land Use Compatibility. The exterior noise environment would be more
than 60 dBA Ldn in portions of the project site. Where exterior noise levels exceed
60 dBA Lda, interior noise levels may exceed 45 dBA Lan• This is a potentially
significant impact.
The primary noise source at the site is traffic noise generated along Casa Grande Road. Additionally,
intermittent noisy activities associated with Casa Grande High School (athletics, social activities, school bells)
and noise associated with the proposed parking lot (engines, car alarms, squealing tires) may be audible at
times, but would not significantly effect the noise environment. Parking lot and school noise would generally
be below noise levels generated along Casa Grande Road and would not be considered major noise sources.
Exterior Noise Levels
Traffic along Casa Grande Road generates noise levels of approximately 70 dBA Ldn at the setback of the
adjacent proposed residences. Based on traffic counts supplied by WTrans Engineering for a previous study',
'Casa Grande Housing Environmental Noise Assessment,111ingworth & Rodkin, Inc., November 9, 2004.
7
traffic noise levels along Casa Grande Road are expected to increase by 0 to 1 dBA in the future. The
conceptual site plan, dated November 22, 2004, does not indicate any common outdoor use areas fronting Casa
Grande Road. Noise levels at private porches fronting Casa Grande Road would be approximately 71 dBA Ldn
and would exceed the 60 dBA Ld„ exterior compatibility standard. However, Petaluma noise guidelines would
typically not be applicable to private porches. Residences located away from Casa Grande Road or shielded
from the roadway by other residential structures would experience lower noise levels. The community
building and the promenade area (between Buildings A and B) would be shielded by the residential buildings
and would experience noise levels of less than 60 dBA Ld.. This impact would be considered less -than -
significant because all residents would have access to common outdoor land uses that would be considered
"normally acceptable" by the City of Petaluma criteria.
Interior Noise Levels
Interior average noise levels in new residential development must be maintained at or below 45 dBA Ld, per
the noise standard established by the State Building Code. Interior noise levels within residential units with the
windows partially open would be approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels assuming typical
California construction methods. Interior noise levels are approximately 25 decibels lower than exterior noise
levels with the windows closed assuming typical California construction methods. Where exterior day -night
average noise levels are less than 70 dBA Ld., interior noise levels can typically be maintained below standards
(45 dBA Ld,) with the incorporation of an adequate forced air mechanical ventilation systems in the residential
unit to allow residents the option of controlling noise by maintaining the windows closed.
Unshielded portions of the west -facing fagades of residences adjacent to Casa Grande Road would be exposed
to future traffic noise levels of about 71 dBA Ldn in the future. Interior noise levels would be approximately 46
dBA Ldp with windows kept closed assuming typical California construction methods. Attaining the necessary
noise reduction (approximately 26 dBA) from exterior to interior spaces is readily achievable with proper wall
construction techniques, the selections of proper windows and doors, and the incorporation of forced -air
mechanical ventilation systems. Sound rated construction recommendations can be made once the final
building plans are made available. It is likely that exterior noise levels generated by traffic along Casa Grande
Road would be reduced below 45 dBA Ld, inside adjacent residences with standard wood -sided or stucco -
sided wall construction and sound rated windows with a minimum rating of STC 28 to 30, provided that
windows are maintained closed. When windows are required to be closed to control noise, the project'must
include an appropriate forced -air mechanical ventilation system to provide a habitable interior environment.
Mitigation Measure 1:
The following measures should be implemented to reduce the impact to a less -than -significant level:
Residences built adjacent to Casa Grande Road should be equipped with forced -air mechanical
ventilation satisfactory to the City of Petaluma Building Department to allow the occupants the
option of maintaining the windows closed to control noise. Additionally, windows with high
sound transmission control (STC) ratings may be required for these residences. As required by
the State Building Code prior to construction, a qualified acoustical engineer should confirm
these calculations when the building elevations and floor plans are finalized (see Figure 3).
W
Figure 3: Recommendations for Mitigation ofNoLw and Land Use Compatibility
(® Forced Air Venlilalion I
Impact 2: Traffic Noise. Project traffic would not substantially increase noise levels along Casa
Grande Road. This is a less -than -significant impact.
The driveway into the project will be from Casa Grande Road. Based on experience with similar projects,
the project is not expected to substantially increase noise levels along Casa Grande Road (increase in
expected to be 0 to 1 dBA). Generally, an increase in noise level of 3 dB or greater would be considered
significant in areas, such as this one, where noise levels exceed 60 dBA L&. A I dB increase would not
generally be noticeable to human hearing and is not considered to be significant.
Mitigation Measures: NONE
Impact 3: Construction Noise. Noise generating activities associated with the construction of
the project would temporarily elevate noise levels at nearby noise sensitive
receptors. This is a potentially significant impact.
Project construction activities would include grading of the site, paving of roadways, construction of
project infrastructure, and construction of individual buildings. The highest noise levels would be
generated during grading of the site, with lower noise levels occurring during building construction.
Large pieces of earth -moving equipment, such as graders, scrapers, and bulldozers, generate maximum
noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Typical hourly average construction -generated
noise levels are about 75 to 80 dBA measured at a distance of 100 feet from the site during busy
construction periods. These noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of distance
between the noise source and receptor.
9
Residential land uses border the project site to the east and Casa Grande High School borders the project
site to the west. Construction activities would not typically be located adjacent to a particular receptor
during the entire construction period. Most construction activities would occur at distances of a hundred
feet or further from these land uses. During the grading of access roads and foundation construction the
noise generated by construction activity would be the greatest to the nearest noise -sensitive land uses.
For brief times, construction activity could move within 100 feet of the residential land uses.
Noise levels at adjacent residences would intermittently exceed 60 dBA Lq and existing ambient levels
by more than 5 dBA when construction occurred on the site. Noise levels produced by heavy equipment
may interfere with normal residential and school activities during busy construction periods when
construction occurs in areas adjacent to residences.
Mitigation Measures:
The inclusion of the following measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level:
• Limit construction to daytime hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) with no construction activities on
Sundays or holidays.
• Use available noise suppression devices and properly maintain and muffle loud construction
equipment.
• Avoid staging of construction equipment and unnecessary idling of equipment within 200 feet of
noise -sensitive land uses.
• Designate a "noise disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any
local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the
cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable
measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site.
10
��3
ATTACHMENT 9
PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
AND
DESIGN GUIDELINES
CASA GRANDE
A PEP HOUSING SENIOR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
(DRAFT)
I. PURPOSE:
A. The purpose of this document is to provide written standards for the site
development of the Casa Grande Senior Residential Community. The overall
objective is to provide specific standards and guidelines for the development of
the site that is sensitive to abutting private and public lands while providing a
living environment that addresses the special needs and challenges of a senior
population within the community.
B. Provides independent living facilities for low-income seniors meeting
objectives as specified in the General Plan.
C. All City Council Resolutions and Ordinances approving the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Planned Unit District (PUD) Development Plan and Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) approvals shall be referenced for this
project.
D. The matters addressed herein are intended to supplement the City of
Petaluma's Zoning Ordinance and building requirements and to promote
environmentally sensitive and logical development of properties within the site.
II. USES:
A. Permitted Principal Uses:
1. Multi -Unit Senior Residential Units
2. Small Family Daycare Facilities with Section 19A-208.
B. Accessory Uses:
1. Non-residential building(s) for recreation, wellness, education, exercise, multi-
use rooms with kitchen facilities and other related uses that would aid and benefit
a senior population.
2. Temporary construction trailers by builders or developers are allowed during
development.
B. Prohibited Uses:
1. All uses that are not specified.
PUDDEVELOPIvM-NT STANDARDS(No. I).doc - 1 - JA4—
III. PROCEDURES
A. The City of Petaluma shall review the design, site layout and landscaping
plans prior to issuance of a building permit.
B. Minor modifications to the PUD Development Standards may be approved in
accordance with Section 19A-700 of the Zoning Ordinance.
IV. GRADING AND DRAINAGE
A. All grading activities shall be completed prior to October 15th unless
specifically approved by the City Engineer. Erosion Control Measures shall be
installed per the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to said date.
B. All grading and excavation shall conform to the geotechnical investigation
report prepared for this project by Miller Pacific Engineering Group, Inc. The
project's geotechnical engineer shall approve the grading plans.
V. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
A. Pedestrian orientation and movement is provided with multiple pathways, focal
points and separation from vehicular traffic. From the parking area, pedestrians
are able to walk a short distance to covered walkways that lead to the units.
B. Orientation to the creek is incorporated as a major focal point for community
activity. The placement of the turn -around and its treatment, provide a setting
that meets the requirements of the fire department and serves as a public plaza
for the residents. The Village Center enhances the feel of a plaza by framing the
turn -around and completing the arc of Building C. The Village Center acts as a
gateway to the creek, providing vistas and pedestrian access through the
building.
C. Building configurations are orchestrated and placed in an organized pattern
that that provides spatial variety, views and visual interest.
D. The building concept clusters units in a two-story hybrid scheme that
combines features of conventional exterior, single -loaded balcony and interior,
double- loaded corridor plans. The intersection of the "L shaped plan and the
curvilinear plan, in Buildings A and B, is defined by a central day -lit courtyard. As
a focal point, its thirty-foot diameter defines an outdoor gathering space for the
residents it serves, thereby adding to the sense of neighborhood within the
community.
E. The shed roof form borrows from the agricultural vernacular of the region.
Buildings provide covered exterior balconies at the second floor to enhance the
connectivity to other portions of the community. Overhangs are extended to five
feet and are supported by bracing elements, providing shade and visual interest
to the roof - lines. Private patios and balconies are integrated and recessed into
POD DEVELOPW--NT STANDARDS(No 1).doc -2- IA!/
the building to provide weather protection and privacy for the residents. The
private balconies project slightly from the face of each building to provide
residents additional views, day lighting and articulation to the elevations. Storage
units are provided at each private balcony.
F. The exterior siding is composed of horizontal plank siding and plain face
panels. The plank siding is used to establish a horizontal base to the building
form that transitions to an upper wainscot of paneling. Panel siding wraps the
ends of each building and defines the circulation walls. This two-tiered approach
provides added scale, detail and opportunities for a color change.
G. Circulation: All stairways are scissor configurations with at least one
intermediate landing for ease of use. Covered exterior balconies and two
elevators access second floor units. Unit entry doors are recessed for enhanced
identity and color change opportunity.
H. The Village Center Building, while accommodating a series of indoor activities,
provides a strong orientation to the outdoors. The linear plan creates a varied
frontage along the creek, culminating at the main community room that opens to
its own semi -circular patio that is punctuated with an outdoor fireplace.
I. Curvilinear walls will be constructed as segmented walls (approximately 8 foot
lengths).
J. The James Hardie Company has reviewed the project and confirmed that their
plank siding will accommodate the segmented radius walls proposed.
VII. LOT SITING AND SETBACKS
A. Minimum Lot size shall be 2.33 acres (101,494 square feet). No further
subdivision shall be permitted.
B. Building Setback Requires:
Front Yard (Casa Grande Road) 20 feet
Side Yard 1 story 10 feet 2-3 story 15 feet
Rear Yard 1 story 5 feet 2-3 story 10 feet
C. Maximum Building Height shall be 35 feet as measured from the finish grade
to the average roof height (midpoint between the primary ridge and eaves of the
roof line).
D. The maximum lot coverage for the site for all structures shall not exceed
52%.
VIII. LANDSCAPE AND FENCING
A. Landscaping and fencing for the Casa Grande shall be as shown on the
approved PUD Master Landscape and Fence Plan.
PUD DEVELOPNENP STANDARDS(No. 1) .doc -3 - [A
B. The owners shall be responsible for installing, landscaping, fencing and the
perpetual maintenance of all items.
C. Future replacement of plants as shown on the PUD Master Landscape and
Fence Plan may be allowed if plants used are from the proposed plant lists as
shown on said plan. Modifications to the approved plant list must be approved
by Community Development Director.
D. All fence replacement must comply with the PUD Master Landscape and
Fence Plan. Modifications to the approved fence design must approved by
SPARC.
E. All trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in size unless otherwise specified;
smaller (5 gallon) may be considered in areas not subject to high pedestrian
access or based on site specific and design purposes. All trees shall be installed
to City planting and staking standards. All shrubs shall be a minimum five -gallon
size. All planted areas not improved with lawn or other groundcover material
shall be protected with a two-inch deep bark mulch as a temporary measure until
the ground cover is established.
F. All plant material shall be served by an automatic underground irrigation
system.
G. All planting shall be maintained in good growing condition. Such maintenance
shall include, where appropriate, pruning, mowing, weeding, cleaning of debris
and trash, fertilizing and regular watering. Whenever necessary, planting shall
be replaced with other plant materials to insure continued compliance with
applicable landscaping requirements. Required irrigation systems shall be fully
maintained in sound operating condition with heads periodically cleaned and
replaced when missing to insure continued regular watering of landscape areas
and the health and vitality of landscape materials.
H. A master landscape plan of the street front areas shall be provided to Staff for
approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscaping shall be installed
prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a bond shall be obtained
guaranteeing the installation of the landscaping at a more weather -permitting
time.
I. Linear root barrier systems shall be utilized for trees near public streets,
parking lots or walkways as needed, subject to City standards.
J. All turf, groundcovers and shrubs shall be kept a minimum of 2' from the base
of all newly planted trees; construction plans shall contain specifications to this
effect.
PUD DEVELOACNT STANDARDS(No.1) .doc - 4 -
K. Landscape construction drawings shall contain detailed planting and irrigation
plans for all public area landscaping, subject to City standards. Plans shall
identify all proposed species and plant spacing and shall include planting details
consistent with City standards. Separate planting legends shall be utilized for
public and private area plant lists. Plant quality specifications shall be provided
to the landscape contractor for all public area street trees and submitted for staff
review prior to approval of construction permits/public improvements.
M. Underground utilities such as water meters and sewer laterals shall be placed
to avoid conflict with street tree planting locations within the street right-of-way.
Transformer vaults, fire hydrants and light standards shall be located in a manner
which allows reasonable implementation of the approved street tree planting plan
for the project without compromising public safety.
P. All work within a public right-of-way requires an excavation permit from the
Department of Public Works.
IX. CONSTRUCTION
A. All grading and major dust generating activities, when practical, shall be
conducted in a manner that contains the dust within the immediate boundaries of
the construction site.
B. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and
Municipal Code Performance Standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.).
C. Prior to any construction activity on the site, protective fencing shall be
installed at the drip line of existing trees located within the immediate vicinity of
proposed construction activity. These trees are identified for preservation per the
arborist report prepared for the project. City Staff shall be notified by the project
proponents prior to commencement of any work proposed closer than the
driplines of trees recommended for preservation. All such activity, including
excavation, pruning and root work shall be conducted under the supervision of
the consulting arborist who will report to staff, with costs borne by the project
proponents.
D. High- or moderate -value trees in good condition (as identified under the
arborist report for the subdivision) proposed for retention but subsequently
damaged or removed during the course of construction shall be replaced by the
developer at the rate of three -15- gallon size trees for each six inches of trunk
diameter removed or damaged, as recommended by the consulting arborist.
Species and location of the replacement trees shall be from the approved
landscape plan.
E. All City -authorized grading and construction activity shall be limited to the
hours between 7:00am and 7:00pm, Monday through Friday, except that indoor
work may be conducted on Saturdays from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM, provided noise
POD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS(No.l).doc -5-
IM
levels generated are within the limits of the City of Petaluma noise limits. No
construction work shall be permitted on recognized holidays and Sundays. The
developer shall designate a construction management person responsible for
responding to any complaints generated regarding excessive noise during
construction. A telephone number for contacting the designated individual shall
be conspicuously posted at the construction site. The responsible authority shall
determine the cause of noise complaints received and implement reasonable
measure to resolve the issues. City staff shall monitor complaints received and
take reasonable steps to resolve issues in a timely manner as they arise,
including enforcement of abatement procedures to bring violations into
conformance with the City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Performance
standards.
X. UNACCEPTABLE USES AND PRACTICES
A. The following uses and practices are deemed to be nuisances. No use or
practice shall be permitted to exist or operate within this property so as to be
offensive or detrimental to any adjacent use, property, or its occupants, including
residential inhabitants of adjacent property.
B. Visible storage of junk, trash, mechanical equipment or non -operational
vehicles; unpermitted storage of prohibited materials such as petroleum, oil,
pesticides, paints, medical wastes and other hazardous materials.
C. Any use, excluding reasonable construction activity, which emits particulate or
gaseous matter, emits dust, sweepings, dirt or cinders into the atmospheres, or
discharges liquid, solid wastes, or other matter into any stream, water course,
river or other waterway, any of which activities may adversely affect the health or
safety of persons, or vegetation, or comfort of or intended reasonable use of
property by persons within the area.
D. The discharge of any fumes, odor, gases, vapors, steam, acids or other
substance into the atmosphere which in the opinion of the City may be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of any person, or may interfere with
the comfort of persons within the area, or which may be harmful to property or
vegetation.
E. The radiation or discharge of intense glare or heat, or atomic,
electromagnetic, microwave, ultrasonic, laser or other radiation.
F. Any use which has the potential to create public health, fire or explosion
hazard in the opinion of the City Fire Marshal.
G. Excessive noise defined as that exceeding the decibel levels established in
the City of Petaluma General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
POD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS(No. 1) doe -6-
10)'J
H. Excessive emissions of smoke, stream, or particular matter, defined as
exceeding the standards established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District,
1. Car repair
X1. EXCEPTIONS TO STANDARDS
A. Whenever the standards contained in the PUD program do not address an
aspect of physical development or use within the development, the Planning
Director may regulate this development by interpreting the most comparable
sections of other City Zoning Districts. The Director may also refer such
questions of development standards or uses to either SPARC or Planning
Commission for a decision. Any decision by the Director, SPARC, or Planning
Commission may be appealed to the City Council through standard appeal
procedures contained in the Zoning Ordinance.
B. Exceptions to specific PUD Standards may be approved by SPARC provided
that the overall design concept and desired quality is not compromised by the
particular exception.
PUD DEVBLOPMENTSTANDARDS(Nn.l).dou -7-
130
R.C.E.49302 P.L.S. 6368
STEVEN J. LAFRANCHI & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS — LAND SURVEYORS
PETALUMA MARINA BUSINESS CENTER
775 BAYWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 312, PETALUMA, CA 94954
TEL 707-762-3122 FAX 707-762-3239
CASA GRANDE
A PEP HOUSING SENIOR RESIDENTLA-L COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
400 Casa Grande Road
APN 017-040-047 (portion)
Petaluma, California
The following Development Schedule for the project as required under Section 19A-206
is approximate and will be updated upon project entitlement approval and completion of
the construction documents.
Start of Construction for Site Improvements .......................................August 2006
Complete site work....................................................................October 2006
Start foundations.................................................................. November 2006
Complete all construction.................................................................July 2007
DcvSchd(1).doc I-�