Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7.A 02/02/2004C. CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AGENDA ]BILL . 74 February 2, 2004 Agenda`Title Meeting Date: February 2, 2004 Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Boulevard Apartments project (03- ZOA- 0405); Meeting Time ❑ 3 PM Introduction of an Ordinance rezoning the property located at 94'5 ® 7:00 PM_ Petaluma Boulevard North from the CH'- Highway Commercial to`the PUD- Planned Unit District; Resolution adopting a Planned Unit Development Plan and' Development Standards for Boulevard Apartments Category (check one) ❑ Consent Calendar Public Hearing ❑ New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation Department Director Contact Person Phone Number Community Mike Moore Lynn Gol er 707 - 578 -7920 Development Cost of Proposal 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 Mitigated Negative. Declaration. 2. Draft Ordinance Rezoning 945 Petaluma Boulevard North 3. Draft Resolution Approving Unit Developrnent'Plan and Development Standards for Boulevard Apartments. 4. Location Map 5. Project Description from Buckelew Programs 6. Justification for Reduced-Parking Requirements 7. Written Understanding Between Buckelew Programs and the City of Petaluma 8. Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan 9.. Planning Commission Staff Report of November 25, 2003 (without attachments) 10. Minutes EXCERPT from Planning.: Commission Meeting of Nov. 25, 2003 11. Memorandum from Cindie Fahy; Petaluma Police Department 12. Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee recommendations 13. Minutes EXCERPT from SPARCMeeting of June 26, 2003 14. Correspondence received 15. Site plan (Exhibit A 1.0) Floor plans (Exhibits A. - I -1, 2.2 3.1, -3.2, 4. 1, and.4.2) Roof plans (Exhibits 2.3, 3.3, and 4.3) Architectural elevations Landscape plan (Exhibit -L -1) Preliminary grading and drainage plan (Exhibit C -1) fi, Summary Statement The applicant, Buckelew Programs, "proposes to construct 15 one- bedroom apartments on the project site. Fourteen very low- income individuals with a mental illness will live in the project, as well as an on -site manager. The long- term affordability of'the rents will be ensured' by the applicant. The Planning Commission . reviewed the proposal at its meeting of November 25,. 2003 and recommended that the Council. 1) adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, 2) approve the rezoning of the subject parcels to PUD- Planned Unit District and 3) approve the, Planned Unit Development`Pl'an and Development Standards subject to a number of conditions. Recommended City Council Action /Su22ested Motion 1. Adopt a resolution adopting,a Mitigated Negative Declaration, including a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, for the Boulevard Apartments project. 2. Introduce an Ordinance rezoning the property locafed at 945 Petaluma..Boulevard North (APN 0 06- 450 =018) from the CH- Highway Commercial to the PUD - Planned Unit District 3. Adopt a resolution approving a Planned Unit Development Plan and Development Standards and associated Conditions of Approval for the Boulevard Apartments Project, Reviewed by Finance Director: Reviewed "by City Attorney Date: ApprojvOdbvC it .Man Date: Da Today's Date k Revision #'and Date Revised: File Code: 1b 4. ,7 v • Mailing List for Boulevard Apartments Katherine Crecelius P.O. Box 967 Novato, CA 94948 Jay Zlotnick Executive Director Buckelew Programs 914 Mission Avenue; 3` Floor San Rafael, CA 94901 11 y CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 2, 2004 AGENDA REPORT FOR BOULEVARD APARTMENTS :PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, REZONING; AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 0 Project - Description The applicant proposes to construct 15 one - bedroom apartments in three one- and two - story, wood frame buildings (see Attachment 5, Project Description). Fourteen very low- income individuals with a mental illness will live in the project, as well as an on -site property manager. The long -term affordability. of the rents will be ensured bythe applicant. A two -story building fronting on Petaluma Boulevard North will include a community room, office, and laundry room on the first floor, and apartments on the. second floor. A patio area on the west side of this building will provide space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Two other apartment buildings will be located in the property's interior. Each apartment will have a private deck or patio. All units will be .entered directly from the outside. The nine ground -floor units will be wheelchair - accessible (see Attachment '15, Site Plan, Floor Plans and Architectural Elevations). The project will be accessed by a single driveway from 'Petaluma Boulevard North. Twelve uncovered parking spaces two of which will be handicapped - accessible, will be distributed throughout the" site. An emergency vehicle turnaround will. be provided on -site. Landscaping will be planted around each of the buildings. Trees will be installed around the entire "project perimeter, including street trees on Petaluma .Boulevard North (see Attachment 15, Landscape Plan). Requested Approvals The applicant has applied to "the City, for the rezoning of the property from the Highway Commercial District to the Planned Unit District, and the adoption of a Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for the Boulevard. Apartments P- fanned Unit District (see Exhibit A of Attachment 3, Draft Resolution). Following Planning Commission review and City Council approval, the proposal will be required to receive Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee final approval for the site, architectural, and landscape plans. General Plan Consisienev The project site's General Plan land use designation Is "Mixed Use," which is intended to allow residential uses along , with commercial uses, including but not limited to retail commercial, offices, and restaurants The pen nitted number of housing units is dependent upon topography, environmental setting, existing and nearby land uses, proximity to major streets and transit, and distance to shopping and parks. Higher densities (10 -30 units /acre) are allowed where • measurable community benefit would be derived; where infrastructure, services, and facilities are available; and where superior design is proposed to ensure an attractive, healthy living environment. The proposed project would have a density of approximately 1B units per acre. The finding can be made that the community will benefit from the provision of affordable housing for the mentally - disabled; that adequate infrastructure, services, and facilities are available -(see discussion in following sections), and that superior design is proposed and will be. ensured through the design review process. Projects that are'entirelyresidential are allowed in areas designated for Mixed Use'onlyupon the granting of a conditional use permit subject to the 1following f 1. The project will help'the City achieve, its housing, policies relating to housing type, location, mix or affordability. 2. The project is designed to be compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The project "w,,ill not`have a detrimental impact on existing infrastructure — especially traffic and access to, the street network. 4. The project will not have a detrimental. impact on the °City's inventory of commercial_ly- developable land but will actually benefit the community by bringing residents closer to commercial and retail services. 5. -Superior design will ensure an attractive, comfortable, and healthy living environment. Staff believes that the above findings can be made because the project will help the City achieve its goals of'providi_ng affordable housing for special needs groups, it will be compatible with surrounding uses, it will have a minimal. impact on traffic and the street network, the :project:sizte is less than an acre'and would not represent a +significantfiloss of 'commercial property, and the City's design process will ensure a superior project ;design. The. project would help the City of Petaluma meet - its share of regional housing need for low'- income housing, and. is supported by a number of Housing Element policies and programs including the following: . Policy L2 Encourage the development, of housing on underutilized , land. Program 4.3 Continue to work with non prof t housing organizations to benefat from their expertise in, and resources for developing a_ nd supporting affordable housing. Policy 6.4 Promote the provision of disabled- accessible units and housing for the mentally- and physically- disabled. Program 6.13 Support the construction of housing specifically designed for. the mentally' ill. Additionally, Policy 9.1 calls for the minimizing of .impacts of affordable and special needs housing,projects on existing.neighborhoods through the design review and' approval process and by working with project managers. Zonin,z District Consistency The. applicant requests that the subject property be rezoned Highway Commercial to Planned Unit District to allow for design flexibility. Development in this zone requires approval by the City Council of a Unit DevelopmentPlan'showing the design of the district, the linterrelatiomhip of uses, and. their relation to the surrounding uses and.area, as well as specific development standards for the district. The applicant has submitted a Unit. Development Plan consisting of a site plan4that depicts building, parking and open space locations (Exhibit A1,0), floor. plans (Exhibits A2.1, 2.2, 3'.1, 3.2, 4.1, and 4.2),.roofplans (Exhibits 2.3, 3.3; and 4,.3), architectural elevations for each building, a landscape plan (Exhibit L -1), and a preliminary grading and drainage plan (Exhibit `C -1). s V • 9 The applicant has also drafted Development Standards for the district that specify permitted principal and accessory uses, maximum, height; minimum lot area, width and depth; minimum v setbacks; and minimum open space (see Exhibit A of Attachment 3, Draft Resolution). p Permitted principal uses would be limited to multiple dwellin gs. Permitted accessory uses are based on those found in.the,.Zoning Ordinance's residential districts, and include signs, accessory buildings such as garages and carports, exempt telecommunications facilities, mini telecommunications facilities, as. well as an on -site manager's office, tenant services such as laundry and mail facilities, and a recreational And meeting room for the use of tenants and their guests. The. proposed maximum building; height of 35 feet is slightly higher .than that of the Garden Apartment Residence District (30 feet) in order to accommadate,,a design feature on Building 3. The proposed maximum building, coverage of 40% is, the same as that of the Garden Apartment Residence District. The proposed minimum side and rear yards (10 and 15 feet, respectively) will provide adequate setbacks from surrounding properties. The proposed zero front yard setback reflects the direction of SPARC, which preferred to site the primary building as close as possible to the front property line to be consistent with the existing commercial'.development to the south along Petaluma Boulevard. Buildirig`'Three will actually be set back seven feet from the property line to accommodate balconies and bays on the second .floor, and the front steps and ramp. As part of the Unit Development Plan, 12 parking spaces are proposed for the project. The applicant has submitted a justification for this parking ratio based' on the fact that at a 16 -unit apartment complex similar to `the.proposed project (Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments in Novato) only six of the 16 residents own cars (see Attachment 6). 'The applicant expects that tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a similar patte is regarding car ownership. Each unit will have a single occupant, ,and only a,few of the very glow- income residents. are, likely to own • cars at initial occupancy. As time goes by, a few more residents may acquire cars since residents will have more affordable rent: However, experience at Margaret Duncan Green Apartments indicates that even after six years, less than half of the residents will own cars. Furthermore, the project site is well =served by public transportation and is close to shopping and other services. Therefore, the 1.2 on -site parking spaces should adequately accommodate both resident and visitor vehicles. Zoning Ordinance Section 19A -300' requires that the City Council make a number of findings to approve the requested rezoning and. Unit Development Plan. The suggested basis for making each finding is outlined in Attachment 2, Draft Ordinance and Attachment 3, Draft Resolution. BACKGROUND SPARCPreliminary Review The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee conducted a preliminary architectural and site plan review of the proposal on June 26, 2003 (see Attachment E, SPARC Minutes). In general, the Committee found the site plan to be 'well- designed, with good buffers from neighboring properties. In response to 'the Committee's comments, the following changes have been made to the project's design: ® The board and. batten has been revised to horizontal siding on all of the elevations. Stucco has been incorporated on the elevations of the other buildings to relate more to the street -front building. e The wood boards with the 'X' design has been removed from the skin of the buildings. The 'X' design has been incorporated .into the stair and guard railings of all three buildings, which consists of perforated metal screen with recycled plastic lumber as the structure creating the 'X' . Shading devices of recycled plastic lumber have been added to. the. east, west, and south facing windows on the two bui- ldings in the west portion of the - site, which will reduce solar ;gain, and therefore, reduce glare and cooling needs during summers. Planning Commission Review The proposal was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their November 25,,:2003 "m:eeting. Attached are the staff report and the approved minutes from that meeting (Attachments 9 and. 10) At their meeting-, .the Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council: 1) adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Boulevard Apartments, 2) approve the`proposed rezoning from CH- Highway Commercial to PUD- Planned Unit District, and 3) approve the proposed Unit Development Plan and Development: Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD. As part of their action, the Planning Commission recommended that .a written` understanding between Buckeew Programs and the City of Petaluma be provided to the City Council as to the operational characteristics of the facility, including: • Selection of the project's property management firm • Sonoma County Mental Health Department's land Buckelew Programs' role in tenant screening and on- going support • Restricti'ons on income eligibility of tenants • Preference given to Petaluma residents for tenancy to the extent allowed by law • Designation of a neighborhood liaison person. from Buckelew and a commitment to meet with neighborhood' representatives as needed • A Written Understanding between Buckelew and the City that incorporates these items is included as Attachment 7. Execution of this Understanding is required by Condition of Approval Number.2 in the attached draft resolution (Attachment 3). The Commission also recommended that SPARC be directed to address:. • Project amenities provided for its residents, including outdoor seating and socialization opportunities • A more detailed' landscape plan for the project. These recommendations .have been included as Condition of Approval Number 4 in the draft resolution (Attachment 3). ,Emerkency Calls for Service At the Planning Commission hearing and,, subsequently during the public comment period at several City Council hearings, -members of the pubic expressed concern over the potential. number and' type of emergency Police and .Fire calls that this facility could generate. An e -mail expressing these same concerns and new information ,alleging that a similar. Buckelew facility in Novato has experienced increased calls for emergency service was received by the Community Development Department after the Planning Commission hearing and is attached as correspondence (Attachment 14). In an effort to .address these concerns, Captain Steve Hood of the Petaluma Police Department' was asked to conduct an• investigation of the actual demand .for emergency services at the,Novato facility and possibly at other Buckelew facilities in the North Bay: Captain Hood will report on his findings directly to the Council at the public hearing for this item. 3. ALTERNATIVES a. The City Council may accept the recommendation from the Planning Commission to adopt a Mitigated. Negative Declaration, approve the requested rezoning and Unit Development. Plan, and Development Standards as conditioned by the Planning Commission. b. The City Council may deny the above requests. 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS This is a private development project'subject to standard cost recovery fees and any applicable City Special Development Fees. This project has received city financial assistance in the form of Petaluma Community Development Commission (PCDC) Housing Fund monies. 5. CONCLUSION The Planning Commission found that the proposed rezoning to the PUD Planned Unit District, the Unit Development Plan and the Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD would not create any significant environmental impacts; that the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Municipal Code; and recommended that the City Counci]' approve the project, subject =to conditions of approval. • 6. OUTCOMES.ORI PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION' N/A 7. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission and Staff recommend, that the City Council: 1) adopt a resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Boulevard Apartments, 2) approve an ordinance to rezone the subject property from CH- Highway Commercial to PUD- Planned Unit District, and 3) adopt a resolution approving a Planned_ Unit Development P=lan and Development Standards for Boulevard Apartments. SACC -City Council \Reports \buckelew020204.doc C7 v l ATTACHMENT 1 2 3 DRAFT 4 RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S. 5 APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 6 BOULEVARD APARTMENTS PU;D TO BE LOCATED AT 945 PETALUMA 7 BOULEVARD NORTH (APN 006 -450 =018) 8 9 WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared and the results of the study indicated that the 10 proposed Boulevard Apartments project, as mitigated, will not cause any significant 11 adverse environmental impacts; and, 12 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma held a public hearing on 13 Noveniber 25, 2003 on.the subject application, heard testimony and concluded that the 14 findings and conditions of approval were adequate and recommended to the City Council 15 approval of the proposed development; and 16 WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Boulevard Apartments proposal on February 17 2, 2004 and considered. all written and verbal communications concerning potential 18 environmental impacts resulting from the project before rendering .,decision; 19 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT.RESOLVED that °the City'Council does hereby find: 20 1. That based upon the,.Imtial. Study, potential impacts resulting from 21 the project have been identified. Mitigation measures have been 22 proposed and agreed to by the applicant as a condition of project 23 approval that° will reduce potential impacts to : less than significant. 24 In addition, there is no substantial evidence that supports a fair 25 argument that the project; as conditioned- and mitigated, would 26 have a significant effect on the environment. 27 2. That the project does not have the potential to affect wildlife 28 resources as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either 29 individually I or cumulatively, and, is exempt from Fish and Game 30 filing fees because . it is proposed on an undeveloped site 31 surrounded by urban development. 32 1,,, That the Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study and 33 considered public comments before making a recommendation on 34 the project. 35 4. That a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure 36 compliance with the adopted mitigation measures. 37 5. That the record of proceedings of the decision on the project is 38 available for public review at the City of Petaluma Planning 39 Division, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California. 40 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby 41 approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Boulevard Apartments project, subject iJ r. 1 to the following Mitigation Measures, Reporting and Monitoring Program, and 2 Construction Measures: • 3 MMiti2ation Measures 4 Air Duality 5 AQ =1. The Applicant shall incorporate, the following Best Management Practices into the 6 construction and improvement plans 'and, clearly indicates these provisions :in the 7 specifications. The construction contractor shall 'incorporate these measures into the 8 required Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive dust and exhaust emissions 9 during construction. 10 a. Grading and construction equipment operated during construction activities 11 shall be properly mufflered and maintained to minimize emissions. Equipment 12 shall be turned off when not in use. 13 b. Exposed' soils shall be watered periodically during construction, a minimum 14 of twice daily: The frequency, of watering shall be increased if wind speeds 15 exceed 15 ,mph. Only purchased city water or reclaimed, water shall be used 16 for this ,purpose. Responsibility for watering to include weekends and holidays 17 when work is not in progress. 18 c. Construction. sites involving earthwork shall provide for a gravel pad area 19 consisting of an impermeable liner and drain rock at the construction entrance 20 to clean mud and debris =from construction vehicles prior to entering the public 21 roadways. Street surfaces in the - vicinity of the project shall'be routinely swept • 22 and cleaned'of mud and dust carried onto the street by construction vehicles. 23 d. During excavation activities, haul trucks used to transport soil shall utilize 24 tarps or other similar covering devices to reduce dust emissions. 25 e. Post- construction re- vegetation, repaving or soil stabilization of exposed soils 26 shall be completed in a timely manner according to the approved Erosion and 27 Sediment Control Plan and verified, by City inspectors prior to acceptance of 28 improvements or issuance of Certificate of'Occupancy. 29 f. Applicant shall designate a person with authority to require increased watering 30 'to- monitor the dust and erosion control program and provide name and phone 31 number to the City of Petaluma prior to issuance of grading permits. 32 g. If applicable the applicant shall obtain operating permits from the Bay Area 33 Air Quality Managerent District, and shall provide evidence of compliance 34 prior to requesting a Certificate of Occupancy. The Planning Department 35 and/or Building Division shall verify that the applicant has obtained an 36 operating permit and that the facilities conform,. to the permit requirements 37 prior to authorizing the Certificate of Occupancy. 38 Geology and Soils 39 G -1. The design of- all earthwork, cuts and fills, drainage, pavements, utilities; 40 foundations and structural components shall conform with the specifications and. criteria 41 contained in the geotechnical report, as approved by the City Engineer. 2 Code regulations for seismic safety (.e., reinforcing shall meet the Unifon Building I' G -2. Foundation and structural design for buildings perimeter and/or load bearing walls, 3 bracing parapets, etc.). 4 G -1 Prior to, issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain a geotechnical 5 engineer to review the final project plans and specifications to determine if they are 6 consistent with the recommendations as outlined in the report and observe grading, 7 compaction, and foundation .excavations to verify that conditions are as anticipated and to 8 modify recommendations if warranted The geotechnical engineer shall sign the 9 improvement plans and- certify the design as conforming to the: specifications. 10 G -4. Construction and improvement plans shall be review' ed for conformance with the 11 geotechnical specifications by the Engineering Section of the Community'Development 12 Department and the Chief Building. Official prior to 'issuance of grading or building 13 permits and /or advertising for bids' on public improvement projects. Additional soils 14 information may be required by the Chief Building Inspector during the plan check of 15 building plans in accordance with Title 17 and 20 of the Petaluma Municipal Code. 16 G -5. The geotechnical. engineer shall inspect the construction work and shall certify to 17 the City, prior to acceptance of the improvements or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 18 that the improvements have been constructed in accordance with the geotechnical 19 specifications. 20 G -6. All earthwork, grading, trenching, backfil'ling, and compaction operations shall be 21 conducted in accordance with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance ( #1046, Title 22 20, Chapter 20:04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code) and Grading and Erosion Control 23 Ordinance # 1576, Title 17, Chapter 17.31 of the Petaluma Municipal Code). 24 G -7. The applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment. Control Plan prepared by a 25 registered professional engineer as an integral, part of the grading plan. The Erosion and 26 Sediment Control Plan shall be subject. to review and approval of the Planning Division and 27 ' Engineering Section, prior to issuance of a grading pennit. The Plan shall include 28 temporary erosion control reasures to be used. during excavation for foundations, and other 29 grading operations'' at the site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the 30 drainage system. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall include the following 31 measures as applicable: 32 a. Throughout, the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be 33 minimized and .the existing vegetation shall be retained to the extent possible 34 to :reduce soil erosion. All construction and grading activities, including short- 35 term needs (equipment staging areas, 'storage: areas, and field office locations) 36 shall. minimize the amount of land area "disturbed. Whenever possible, existing 37 disturbed,areas shall be used for such purposes. 38 b. All drainage- ways; wetland areas and creek channels shall be. protected from 39 silt and sediment in storin runoff through the use of silt fences, diversion 40 berms, and check dams. - All exposed surface areas shall be mulched and 4.1 reseeded and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected with hay mulch and/or 42 erosion, control' blankets as appropriate. I c. Material and equipment for implementation oferosion control measures shall 2 be on -site by October l st, All grading activity shall be, completed by October • 3 15th, prior to the on -set of the rainy season, with all disturbed areas stabilized 4 and re-vegetated by October 31st. Upon approval by the Petaluma City 5 Engineer, extensions for short-term grading may be allowed The 6 Engineering Section in conjunction with any specially permitted rainy season 7 grading may require special erosion control measures. 8 G -8. All public and private improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff -for 9 compliance with the approved' improvement plans; prior to their acceptance by the City. 10 Hydrology a"ud Water Quality 11 HA. All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that :minimizes the 12 sediment and/or pollutants entering directly or indirectly into the storm drain system or 13 ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following provisions into the 14 construction .plans and ,specifications, to be verified by the Engineeri ng Section, prior to 15 issuance of 'grading or building pennits. 16 a: The applicant shall, designate construction staging areas and 'areas for 17 storage of any hazardous materials (Le., motor oil, fuels; paints, etc.) used 18 during construction on the : improvements plans. All. construction staging 19 areas shall be located away from any drainage areas to prevent runoff from '20 construction areas from entering into the drainage system. Areas designated 21. for storage of hazardous materials shall include proper containment features 22 to prevent contaminants from entering drainage areas in the event of a spill • 23 or leak. 24 b. No :debris, soil, silt, .sane, cement, concrete or Washings: thereof, or other 25 construction related materials or wastes, oil or petroleum `products or other 26 organic or earthen material ,shall be allowed to enter :any drainage system. 27 All discarded material including washings and accidental spills shall be 28 removed and disposed of at an approved disposal site. The applicant shall 29 designate appropriate disposal methods and/or facilities on the construction 30 plans or in the specifications. 31 H -2. The applicant shall submit a detailed grading and drainage plan for review and 32 approval by the City Engineering and Planning Departments prior to approval of an 33 improvement plan or • a grading ov building permit. The project grading :and all site 34 drainage improvements, shall be designed and constructed in 'conformance with tl e'City of 35 Petaluma Engineering Department's "Standard' Specifications.": The drainage plans shall 36 include supporting' calculations of storm drain and" culvert size using acceptable 37 engineering, methods. All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall be 38 subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 39 H -3. The applicant shall pay the City'.s Storm ;Drainage Impact Fee. Drainage Impact 40 Fees. shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and a fair shareportion shall 41 be. paid for each residential unit prior to final. inspection of issuance of a, Certificate of 42 Occupancy. 43 I Noise 2 N -1. All construction activities shall comply with applicable Performance Standards in 3 the Petaluma Zoning Qrdinance and Municipal Code, including the following: • • 4 a. All construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 5 Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 6 Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays and all holidays recognized 7 by the City of Petaluma, unless a permit is first secured from the City 8 Manager (or his /her designee) for additional hours. 9 b. There shall be no start up of machines nor equipment prior to 8:00 a.m., 10 Monday through Friday; no delivery of materials nor equipment prior to 11 7:30 a.m. novpast 5 :00 p.m., MondayAhrough Friday; and no servicing of 12' equipment past. 6:45 p.m., Monday through' Friday. Plans submitted for 13 city permits shall include the language above: 14 C. Construction maintenance, storage, and staging areas for construction 15 equipment shall avoid proximity to residential, areas to the maximum extent 16 practicable. Stationary construction equipment, such as compressors, 17 mixers, etc., shall be placed away from residential areas and/or provided 18 with acoustical shielding. Quiet construction. equipment shall be used when 19 possible. 20 d. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall 21 be properlymuffled and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be 22 turned off when not -in use. 23 e. The applicant shall designate a Project. Manager with authority to 24 implement the mitigation measures who will be responsible for responding 25 to any complaints, from the neighborhood prior to issuance of a 26 building/grading The Project Manager 'shall determine the cause of 27 noise complaints (e.g. starting too early, faulty muffler, etc.) and shall take 28 prompt action to correct the problem. 29 N -2. All residential units shall be constructed using appropriate construction techniques 30 and materials to- achieve compliance with the noise standard for `interior living area (45 31 dBA maximum noise level) and the General Plan standard for, exterior yards (60 dBA). A 32 forced air mechanical ventilation system shall be installed in conjunction with sound -rated 33 windows asmeeded'to'rriaintain interior noise levels at or below 45 dBA Ldn. The applicant 34 shall provide; an 'acoustical report prepared by a.' qualified acoustical engineer that 35 demonstrates that the proposed building construction will meet both interior and, exterior 36 noise standards. Said report shall be submitted by the .applicant for review and approval of 37 the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building perinit. 38 Visual Quality- andAestheties 39 VQ -1. The projects outdoor lighting .plan, including the proposed design and location of 40 lighting fixtures, shall be, subject to approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review 41 Committee. I VQ -2. All exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and 2 shielded to prevent 3 standards and/or wa`I gl ar e oun ed l�htsn a djacent shall b properties. Only .isity. light • P p y low= nten g used (no flood lights). Lights attached to 4 buildings shall provide a, "soft wash" of light 'against the wall and shall generate no direct 5 glare-Parking lot and security lighting shall be typical of lighting for multi - family uses. 6 IMPLEMENTATION ? 1. The a lic pp ant shall be required to obtain all required. permits from responsible 8 agencies and provide proof of compliance to the Cityprior to issuance of grading 9 permits ;or approvals of improvements plans. _ 10 2. The applicant shall .incorporate all applicable code provisions and required 11 mitigation measures and conditions into the design and improvements plans and 12 specifications for the project. 13 3. The applicant all notify all employees, contractors, and agents ;involved in the 14 project implementation of mitigation measures and conditions applicable to 'the 15 project and shall ensure compliance with :such measures and conditions. Applicant 1.6 shall notifyall assigns and transfers of the same. 17 4. The applicant shah provide for the cost of monitoring of any condition or mitigation 18 measure that involves on- going operations' on the site or long -range improvements, 19 such as archaeological resources, etc. 20 MONITORING 21 1. The .Building Division, Planning • Division Engineering 'Section and Fire 22 Departments shall, review the improvement and construction plans for conformance 23 with the approved project description and all applicable codes, conditions, 24 mitigation measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of 'a. site design 25 review, improvement plans, grading plans, or building permits. 26 2. `The .Planning Division shall ensure that the applicant has obtained applicable 27 required,per nits from all responsible agencies and that the plans, and specifications 28 conform to the permit requirements prior . to the issuance of grading or building 29 permits. 30 3. .Prior to acceptance of improvements or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all 31 improvements shall..be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the 32 project description, permit conditions, and approved development or improvement 33 plari-s, 34 CONSTRUCTION MEASURES 35 .1. The applicant shall designate a. project manager with authority to implement all 36 mitigation measures and conditions of approval: and provide name, address; ;and -37 phone numbers to the City prior to issuance of any grading permits and signed by 38 the contractor responsible for construction. 39 2. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as, conditions on 40 the building _or grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for 41 construction. 1 ATTACHMENT 2 2 DRAFT 3 ORDINANCE NO. N.C.S. 4 5 Introduced by Councilmember Seconded by Councilmember 6 7 8 9 REZONING THE PROPERTY AT 945 PET ALUMA' BOULEVARD NORTH 10 (APN 006 2 450 -018) TO THE PUD= PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT 11 12 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE 'COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA AS 13 FOLLOWS: 14 Section 1. The City Council finds that the Planning Commission .filed with the City 15 Council its report set forth in its minutes of November 25, 2003, recommending the 16 adoption of an amendment to Zoning Ordinance, Section 1072 N.C.S,., as amended, by 17 rezoning certain land being more, particularly described as Assessor's Parcel No. 006- 18 450 -018 from CH= Highway Commercial to PUD - Planned Unit District. 19 Section 2. The City Council further finds. that the Council held a public hearing on said 20 proposed amendment on February 2, 2004 after giving notice of said hearing, in the 21 manner, for the period, and in the form required by said Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as • 22 amended. 23 Section 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as amended, 24 the City Council finds as follows: 25 1. The proposed amendment is in general conformity with the Petaluma General 26 Plan and any applicable plans. 27 The PUD zoning is. consistent with the intent of the Mixed Use Land Use 28 Designation. and. will help the City achieve its goals of providing affordable 29 housing for special needs groups.. 30 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare` require or clearly permit 31 the adoption of the proposed amendment. 32 The PUD zoning will Help the City achieve its goals of providing affordable 33 Housing ;for ;special needs groups. The project site is less than an acre and would 34 not represent a significant Toss of commercial property. 35 Section 4. 'The 'City Council further finds that the requirements of'=the California 36 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been satisfied through the preparation of an 37 Initial Study and the drafting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration to avoid or reduce to a 38. level of insignificance, the potential impacts generated by the proposed. Boulevard 39 Apartments Planned.Unit Development. 40 Section 5. Pursuant to the provisions of Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., and based 41 upon the evidence it has received and in accordance with the findings made, the City 42 Council hereby adopts an amendment to said Zoning; Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., so as to el 1 2 3 4 5 6. 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2.1 22 23 24 25 26' 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 rezone said property herein referred to, in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby directed to post this Ordinance for the period and in the: manner required by the City Charter. IF ANY SECTION, ,subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase or word of the Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, unlawful or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have: passed, and adopted this Ordinance and each ,and. all provisions thereof irrespective of the fact .that :any.one or more of said provisions be declared unconstitutional, unlawful or otherwise invalid. INTRODUCED and ordered posted/published this 2nd day of February, 2004. ADOPTED this day of AYES: NOES ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 2004, by the following voter . Mayor ATTEST. City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM City Attorney 0 1.. 1 ATTACHMENT 3 2 DRAFT 3 RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S. 4 APPROVING THE- UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT 5 STANDARDS FOR THE BOULEVARD APARTMENTS PLANNED UNIT 6 DEVELOPMENT 7 8 WHEREAS', the Planning Commission filed with the City Council its .report set forth in its 9 minutes of November 25, 2003, recommending approval, of a Unit Development Plan and . 10 Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments project. 11 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on said Unit Development Plan and 12 Development Standards on February 2, 2004 after giving notice of said hearing, in the 13 manner, for the period and in the form required by said Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as 14 amended. 15 WHEREAS, the requirements, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have 16 been satisfied through the preparation of an Initial Study and the drafting of a Mitigated 17 Negative Declaration to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts 18 generated by the proposed Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit Development. 19 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby find: . 20 1. The PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or 21 more thoroughfares, and that said thoroughfares' are adequate to carry any 22 additional traffic generated by the development. 23 The traffic impaet,study pre paired for the proposed project concluded that the levels of 24 service (LOS) at the three intersections. studied would be unchanged at LOS B, C, and 25 A, respectively, if project .traffic were to be added. All three intersections, therefore, 26 would continue to operate below LOS D, which is typically considered to be an 27 acceptable service level °for signalized intersection operations. 28 2. The plan for the proposed development presents a. unified and organized arrangement 29 of buildings and service; facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or 30 nearby properties and that adequate _landscaping .and' /or screening is included if 31 necessary to insure compatibility. 32 SPARC was supportive of the preliminary site plan. The project's preliminary 33 landscaping plan calls for`trees to be planted along all of the property lines that adjoin 34 existing uses in addition to the planting of vines on perimeter fences in order to 35 provide screening for neighboring properties. 36 3. The natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected,,., with, adequate available 37 public and private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan. 38 The ,project site lacks any significant natural or scenic qualities. A patio area on the 39 west. side of this building will provide space for outdoor recreation and socialization. 40 Each apartment will have a private deck or patio. 1 4. The development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant, 2 will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City, 3 and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning - regulations of 4 the City of Petaluma, with the Petaluma General Plan, and with any applicable plans 5 adopted'by the City: 6 A Written Understanding will be executed between the applicant and the City that 7 ensures the project will operate in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding, 8 community. An Initial Study that evaluated potential environmental impacts 9 associated with the project determined that no. significant envirbim,6ntal .effects 10 would result from this proposal. The project will help the City meet its goals for 11 providing affordable :housing for special needs groups. It is consistent with the 12 Zoning Ordinance principles ' of promoting orderly' community develop_ ment. and 13' providing open space for light and air. 14 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does ' hereby 15 approve, pursuant to the provisions of Zoning- Ordinance No. 1072 .N:C.S., and based upon 16 .the evidence it has received, the Boulevard Apartments Unit Development Plan (including 17 the preliminary site,; floor, roof, architectural, lands_ cape, grading 'and drainage plans as 18 submitted) and the Development Standards, the Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit 19 . District set. forth in ; EXhibit A, subject to the conditions set forth below. 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 21 22 Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit Development 23 945 Petaluma Boulevard North, APN 006 -450 -0`18 24 Project 03 ZOA- 0.405 -CR 25 26 From. "tine Planning Division 27 1. Approval is ,granted for fifteen apartment units, fourteen of which .are to be occupied 28 by a single person with.a serious mental illness. Any future conversion of`the project 29 to market -rate housing occupied_ by the public at -large is subject to approval by the 30 City Council. 31 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for`theproject, the City and the applicant 32 shall execute the Written Understanding Between Buckelew Programs and the City of 33 Petaluma. 34 3. Plans submitted for ;a building permit shall include a plan sheet containing all 35 conditions of approvallmitigation`measures. 36 4. The design elements of the project ,shall be ,subject to Site Plan and- Architectural 37 Review Committee ( SPARC) approval, including, but not limited'to, building design, 38 materials, and colors, building height and mass, landscaping, lighting, and fencing. 39 The final landscape plan submitted for SPARC review shall include the numbers and 40 sizes of all pl'antdig materials. SPARC shall ensure that the project's plans provide 41 adequate, outdoor seating and socialization opportunities for project residents. 42 5. In accordance; with the provisions of the Petaluma's Municipal Code, the applicant 43 shall pay applicable City Special Development' Fees at the time of building permit C7 1. application, ,including but not limited to sewer connection, water connection, • 2 community facilities development, storm drainage impact, school facilities and traffic 3 mitigation fees 4 6. Indoor, Bound -floor, secure bicycle parking shall be provided for each apartment. 5 Secure bicycle parking ahal'1 also be provided at Building 316T visitors and staff. 6 7. There shall be no direct glare into cyclist /pedestrian eyes, including from security 7 lighting. 8 8. Project residents shall be provided with information about bus routes and transit 9 service. 10 9. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide a 11 simply one -page document to the city naming a designated "transportation 12 coordinator" and describing specific incentives for residents to walk, bicycle, or take 13 transit. 14 10. An on -site trash, enclosure shall be provided, the design and location of which shall be 15 subject to the approval of the Planning Division. 16 11 All landscaping shall be installed to City standards prior to issuance of Certificate of 17 Occupancy. 18 12. All trees shall be a minimum fifteen (1 °5) gallon size, unless otherwise specified. 19 Smaller trees (5 gallon) may be considered in :areas: not 'subject to high pedestrian 20 access or based on site specific and design, purposes. All shrubs shall be five - gallon in 21 size. All planted areas not improved with lawn or other groundcover material shall be 22 protected with a two -inch deep organic mulch as a temporary measure until the 23 ground cover is established. 24 13. Street trees shall be planted along the project frontage. The type and number of trees 25 shall be determined;by SPARC. 26 14. All plant material shall be served by a city- approved automatic irrigation system. A 27 separate water meter shall be provided for the irrigation system, or as required by 28 staff. 29 15. All planting shall be :maintained in good condition. Such maintenance shall include, 30= where appropriate, pruning, mowing; weeding, cleaning of debris and trash, 31 fertilizing and regular watering. Whenever necessary; ,planting shall be replaced with 32 other plant materials to insure continued compliance with applicable landscaping 33 requirements Required irrigation systems shall be fully maintained in sound operating 34 condition with heads periodically cleaned and replaced when missing to insure 35 continued 'regular watering of landscape areas, and health and vitality of landscape 36 materials. 37 16. Linear root barrier ,systems shall be utilized for trees near public streets or walkways 38 as needed, subject to staff review and approval. 39 17. All street trees and other plant materials within the public; right -of way shall be 40 subject to inspection by the project landscape architect or designer prior to installation I and by City staff prior to acceptance by the City, for conformance', with the approved 2 quality specifications. 3 18. All tree stakes and ties shall be removed within one year following installation or as 4 soon as trees able to stand erect without support. 5 19. The project shall i utilize Best Management practices regarding pesticide %herbicide use 6 and ,fully commit to Integrated Pest Management techniques for the protection of 7 bicyclists and pedestrians. If pesticides or herbicides are used in areas by 8 pedestrians/bicyclists, warning "signs shall be posted. 9 20. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and .hold harmless the City or 'any of its 10 boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or 11 proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees to 12 attack, set aside' ; void or annul, "the approval of the project when such claim or'action 13, is brought withi'ii the time period provided for in applicable State and/or I cal statutes. 14 The City shall, promptly :notify the applicants of any such claim, action,. or 15 proceeding. The - City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this 16 condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action,. 17 or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City defends 18 the action in good faith. 19 From the Engineering Division 20 21. Public. improvement plans shall be submitted for the frontage improvements,, and 21 water and storm drain systems in the public right -of -way. 22 22. Frontage improvements shall be constructed, including but not limited, -to curb, gutter, 23 sidewalk, streetlights, and fire hydrants, and shall include the following additional 24 improvements: 25 a. The sidewalk shall be at least six feet wide. 26 b: Reconstruct at least two feet of the street from the lip of gutter. 27 c: Existing utility boxes shall be adjusted to conform to new grades. 28 d. The driveway approach shall be at least 24 feet wide, with four -foot transitions on 29 both sides of the driveway. 30 e. A "right turn only ":sign shall be installed at °the exit of the driveway. 31 23. A .catch basin. shall be installed at the curb upstream of the proposed driveway and 32 connect to the existing storm drain, system at Magnolia Avenue. 33 24. All onsite utilities (water, sewer and storm drain) shall be labeled "Private" on the 34 applicable plans. 35 25. The public storm drain system shall be reviewed and approved by the .Sonoma 36 County Water Agency. 37 26. The Fire Marshal's office shall approve the locations of the two proposed fire 38 hydrants. Fire 'flow calculations shall be provided -to demonstrate that the fire 39 hydrants are capable of delivering the fire flow required by the Fire Marshal's office. • 40 I From the Fire Marshal 2 27. The Petaluma Municipal Code Section 17.20.070 Fire Code Amendment requires that 3 both public and' private dead -end mains are to be of an inside diameter of not less than 4 8 inches. 5 28. Provide details and specifications for the "Ground Cover Paving System" in the fire 6 apparatus turnaround.. 7 29. Provide "No Parking — Fire Lane" signs as directed `by the Fire Marshal's office for 8 the fire apparatus turnaround. 9 30. Building(s) shall. be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system as required by the 10 Uniform Fire Code and shall be provided with central station alarm monitoring, 11 which will notify the fire department in the event of water flow. In addition, a local 12 alarm that will sound upon activation 'of the'fire sprinkler system shall be provided on 13 the exterior and interior of each building. Said alarms shall be installed prior to a 14 Certificate of Occupancy. 15 31. Contractors installing ° underground fire sprinkler mains shall obtain a permit and 16 submit two sets of plans for approval prior to commencing work. A hydrostatic test of 17 200 psi for two hours is required. prior to backfill. All joints shall be visible at time of 18 inspection. Underground installations shall be flushed to fire department satisfaction 19 prior to connection to overhead. NOTE: Civil utility plans and/or other plans 20 approved, or not; will not be accepted in lieu of the above - requirements. • 21 32. All contractors performing work on fire sprinkler systems, either overhead systems or 22 underground fire service mains, shall have a C -16 Contractors License. 23 33. At time of building permit submittal, all contractors shall have a city business license 24 and a workers cornpensation certiftcate on file with the Fire Marshal's office. 25 34. This plan has been reviewed with the .information supplied. Subsequent plan 26 submittal for review may be subject to additional requirements as plans are revised. 27 From Water Resources & Conservation Department 28 35. Abandon all unused .water services (if any) at the water main to the Water 29 Department's satisfaction. 30 From .Police 31 The project site shall be posted as private parking for parking enforcement °purposes. 32 36. .Address numbers and fetters shall be large, with contrasting colors, for enhanced 33 visibility. Theyshall be located near each unit's front door. 34 37. A "peep hole" shall be installed in each front door to allow occupant to view outside 35 their door. 36 38. The on -site manager shall maintain current emergency numbers for all tenants. 37 0 38 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BOULEVARD APARTMENTS PLANNED UNIT' DISTRICT 945 PETALUMA BOULEVARD NORTH PURPOSE: To provide areas within the City of Petaluma where multi- family housing at low -to moderate densities and• characterized by individual and common landscaped open space may be established. This PUD is intended to accommodate apartment. houses up to two stories in height, together with the private and public open space and public facilities required for a satisfactory resident environment. PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES: The following are the principal uses permitted in this Planned Unit District: 1. Multiple dwellings. PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: 1. Signs in accordance. with the provisions of Section 21 -204. 2. Other accessory buildings such as garages and carports customarily appurtenant to a permitted use. 3. Exempt telecommunications facilities in accordance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 14.44'' of the Petaluma Municipal Code. 4. Mini telecommunications `facilities, in accordance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 14.44 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, which have received site plan and architectural review and approval by the Planning Director. 5. An on- site manager's office. 6. Tenant services, including laundry and mail facilities. 7. A recreational and:meeting room for the use of tenants and their guests. HEIGHT REGULATIONS: No principal building shall exceed thirty -five feet in height, and no accessory building shall exceed twenty -five feet 'in height, except as provided in Section 24 -100. AREA, LOT, AND YARD REQUIREMENTS: The following_ minimum requirements shall be observed. Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lof Width Minimum Lot Depth Max. Building Coverage Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 30;000 sq. ft. 1 1.00. feet 300 feet 40 % 0 feet 10 feet 15 feet 1. The site area per dwelling unit shall be twenty -five hundred (2,500) square feet 2. The area of usable open space shall be four hundred (400) square feet per unit. Both private and common, shared open space shall count towards the required usable open space per dwelling unit. The area of usable private balconies and patios can be counted for up to one hundred (100) percent of the usable open space requirement. A usable private balcony or patio shall be not less than three (3) feet in its least dimension and have an area of not; less than fifteen (15) square feet. At least one -half (1 /2) the perimeter of a balcony shall be open except for the required railing. A usable, balcony or patio shall have direct access from a principal room of the apartment it serves.. PAAKING: The minimum parking standard shall be ..75 parking spaces per unit. Parking spaces may be uncovered. M !y' ATTACHMENT 5 Boulevard Apartments Project Descripti ®n Boulevard Apartments will have 15 one - bedroom units .in' 3 one and two -story buildings. The two -story building fronting on Petaluma .Blvd. North includes a community room, office, and laundry zoom on the first floor with apartments on the second floor. A garden area on the south side of the building. provides space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Each apartment; has a private deck or patio. All.units enter directly from outside. The nine ground floor units are, wheelchair accessible:' Fourteen very low - income individuals with a mental illness will live in Boulevard Apartments, as well as. an on =site manager. Boulevard Apartments residents will move from. other apartments and homes where they are now living independently in the community. However, most are now living in overcrowded situations and/or where rent is not affordable. Boulevard Apartments will provide rents that are affordable on a long -term basis. Buckelew Programs will provide supportive services to residents. For 31 years Buckelew Programs has provided a wide range of services to mentally ill adults and their families in Mann County. In 1999, at the request of the Mental Health Division of the Sonoma County Department of Health Services Buckelew began to serve adults with mental illness in Sonoma County. Through its Sonoma. County Independent Living • Program (SCIL), Buckelew currently provides supportive services to 104 low and very- low income adults with mental illness in Sonoma. County: The- SCIL Program will provide assistance to meet individual needs, such as case management, social and recreation activities, access to employmerit Land training programs, and assistance in accessing community services. Potential Boulevard Apartments residents will ;go through two . screening processes to assess their ability to living independently. They will be screened by Sonoma County Department of Mental, Health and then again by Buckelew's - SOIL Program. Funding Buckelew has received ,a Section_ 81 1 Fund Reservation for development of Boulevard Apartments with additional funds for rental subsidies. The City of Petaluma has also allocated Community Development Block Grant and Redevelopment Agency Housing Set -Aside funds for development of Boulevard Apartments. P.0 D. Findings 1. Section 19A -300 (1): Please see TJKM traffic study for the proposed Boulevard Apartments development. The site for Boulevard Apartments is adjacent, to Petaluma Boulevard North, which is adequate to carry the minimal additional traffic generated by Boulevard Apartments. 2. Section 19A -300 (2): Please see site and landscape plans submitted with this application. 'The landscape plan shows ample screening on the north, south, and west property lines. Building 3, which is adjacent to Petaluma Boulevard North, is compatible with commercial development on the Boulevard. Buildings 1 and 2 in v the mid and rear sections of the site are designed to compliment residential developments on the south and west sides of the project site. 3. Section 19A -300 .(3) The site is currently a nearly flat vacant lot without trees or vegetation. The site plan submitted with the application shows a new common garden space on the south side of the property, which will create an attractive green space on.the site. Outdoor open space Js more than adequate. 4, Section 19A -30:0 (4): City. staff and representatives from Buckelew have analyzed many alternatives for use of the 945 Petaluma Boulevard site. Staff and the Buckelew development team are pleased with the site plan that has evolved from this process; It has long- been a Council goal to provide for the broad spectrum of housing: need. This community of permanent housing with supportive services wilt provide safe, decent affordable units,for:this special needs'population., Design Review Buckelew :Programs has decided to apply for Design Review after the zone change is approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. August 6, 2003 10 • 0 ATTACHMENT 6 Justification for Reduced Parking Requirements for Boulevard Apartments Submitted by Buckelew Programs Buckelew Programs collaborated with: Ecumenical Association for Housing to develop a 16 -unit apartment- complex in Novato now called. Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments (MDG). This development has been occupied since the fall of 1997. Very low - income: residents'served by Buckelew Programs live in the 16 one - bedroom units at Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments. MDG residents are similar to potential residents at Boulevard Apartments. As of September 2003, only'6 of the 16 MDG residents owned cars. Buckelew Programs expects that tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a similar pattern regarding car ownership. Boulevard Apartments is well served by public transportation and is close to shopping. Only a few residents at initial occupancy are likely to have cars. As time goes by, a. few more residents may acquire cars, since residents will :have more affordable rent. However, experience at Margaret Duncan Green Apartments indicates that even after 6 years, only 5 -6 residents will' own cars. Therefore 12 arkin spaces aces will provide ample le s ace for guests and staff, as P 9 p p P P 9 well as residents. ATTACHMENT 7 WRITTEN UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN B.UCKELEW PROGRAMS AND THE CITY OF PETALUMA Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit Development 945 Petaluma Boulevard North, APN 006 -450 -018 Project 03 -ZOA70405 -CR The following is agreed to, with regard to the Boulevard Apartments project at 945 Petaluma Boulevard, Petaluma: 1. Boulevard Apartments will include one unit of housing for an on -site Property Manager. 2. The Property Manager shall be an employee of Petaluma Ecumenical Properties (PEP). Alternatively, if property management services are to be provided by another entity, Buckelew Programs will consult with the City of Petaluma Housing Administrator for input regarding selection of the property management firm. 3. The property manager will screen all prospective tenants to assure that they meet HUD eligibility income guidelines, collect rents, and assure that ongoing property maintenance needs are met, 4. Sonoma County Mental Health Department staff will do an initial screening of potential Buckelew Programs' clients for suitability to be referred to Buckelew's independent living program. In addition, Buckelew Programs will assess all potential tenants of Boulevard Apartments for suitability to live independently. 5. To the extent allowable by Federal and State .law, preference for tenancy will be given to individuals who live or work in Petaluma. 6. Buckelew Programs will provide ongoing supportive mental health services to tenants of Boulevard Apartments. All tenants of Boulevard Apartments will be advised of the procedure to contact Buckelew Programs staff, for routine and emergency support; services. 7. Buckelew Programs will designate' a staff member herein referred to as the Neighborhood Liaison Person (NLP), and the NLP's name and phone number shall, be provided to the City of Petaluma. Housing Administrator, the City'.s Community Development Director, and to neighbors who request it. 8. Upon request and at mutually agreeable times, the NLP will meet with representatives of the neighborhood. For Buckelew Programs For the City of Petaluma 0 ATTACH 6VI E BSI T 8 initial .Study of Envir®nMental' Significance ® Introducfion This Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental .Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq) andthe 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 on file at the City of Petaluma Planning Project Name Boulevard Apartments Site - Address 945 Petaluma Boulevard North Posting Date . November 5, 2003 Lead Agency Contact • Applicant City of Petaluma Lynn Goldberg Contract Planner 11 English Street Petaluma. CA ;94952 (707) 578 -7920 Buckelew ,Programs Katie Crecelius 914 Mission Avenue Hayward CA '94544 (415) "457 -6964 File Number Assessor's Parcel No. End of Comment Period Property Owner Petaluma Community Development Commission P.O. Box 61 Petaluma ,CA 94:953 (707) 7784484 Project Description 03- ZOA- 0405 -CR 006450 -018 November 25, 2003 The, applicant has applied to the City for a; rezoning 'of the subject property from the Highway Commercial District to the Planned Unit District and the approval of a Unit Development Plan. The request has been made for'the purpose of constructing 15 one - bedroom apartments in three one - and two -story, wood frame. buildings. Fourteen very low- income individuals with a mental 'illness will live in the project, as well as an on -site manager.. The long -term affordability of the rents will be.ensured by the applicant. A two -story building f cinting;:on Petaluma Boulevard North will _include a community room, office, and laundry room on the first floor, with apartments on the second floor. A patio area on the west .side of this building will provide space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Two other apartment `buildings will be located in the property's interior. Each apartment will have a private deck or patio.. All units will be entered directly from the ..outside: The nine ground -floor units will be wheelchair - accessible. The project will be accessed by a single. driveway from Petaluma Boulevard North. Twelve parking spaces, two of which will be handicapped - accessible, will be distributed throughout the site. An emergency vehicle turnaround Will be� provided on -site. Landscaping will be planted around each of the buildings. Trees will be installed around the , entire project perimeter, including four trees adjacent to Petaluma Boulevard North. Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 2 Project Setting The :85- acreproj'ect site is located, at ,the- north end of the downtown area, on the west side of Petaluma. Boulevard North between Sycamore Lane / Shasta Avenue and Magnolia .Avenue, and approximately 2,200 feet west of the Petaluma River. Surrounding uses include the Petaluma Police Station to the north, 'Town and" Country Shopping Center and ;strip commercial to the east, a commercial building and single- family residences to the south, and single- and multi - family residences to the west. The site is relatively level and approximately two to three feet higher in elevation than the adjacent street grade, cu The site is rrently vacant and covered with short grass, with a few shrubs and trees; along the property edges. The property has been used in the past as a headstone carving yard, and a building once stood near its center as early as 1877. Surrounding. zoning includes Highway Commercial on the properties to the north, south and 'southwest; Neighborhood Commercial to,the. east; and PUD to the northwest. Responsible/Trustee Agencies None '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 hnpact "'as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 1. Land "Use,& Planning 2. Population Employment &.Housing 3. Geology & Soils 4. Air Quality 5. Hydrology& Water Quality 6. Biological Resources M Determination 9. Hazards & Hazardous: Materials 10. Transportation/Traffic H. Public Services 12. Recreation 13. Utilities Infrastructure 14. Mineral Resources: 1�5. Cultural Resources 16. Agricultural Resources 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance I find that: although the; proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will 'not be 'a significant effect in this case because, revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. A Notice of Intent to adopt a - Negative Declaration Mfl'be prepared, distributed -and posted for the public comment period'of November 2003 through. November 25, 2003. Prepared by: Lynn;Goldberg, Contract Planner Signs 7. Noise 8. Visual Quality & Aesthetics Date b • • 0 LOCA.TION Im. NumbF•c Total Persons: 7437 African American: ;! American Indian ;? Asian or Pacific Is. 14ii Hispanic White 466 Hispanic Non -white _ White Non - Hispanic 6Sny z 1 fee eo 945 PETALUMA BLVD. NORTH -450-018 rot APN 006 Boulevard Apts. Initial. Study -File No 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts • 1. Land Use and Planning a. The project site is an infill property. 'The. project represents a continuation of development along Petaluma Boulevard North. b. Policies or regulations contained in the. Petaluma General Plan or Zoning Ordinance that have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating ~an, environmental effect. and - that_ apply to the project are limited to the following policies of the General Plan' Transportation Element: Policy 9: Land use decisions shall take into consideration potential traffic impacts. Policy 10: New development shall be required to pay apro -rate: share of needed traffic improvements. The projeefs potential traffic, impacts are addressed in Section .10 and have been determined to be insignificant. The o e t will a a Traffic Mitigation Fee to the'Ci , nor to the issuance of building permits. eP l c pay g. _. h'P a gP s. c. There are no habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans.that apply to the project site. Mitigation Measures/MonitorinQ None.required 2. Populafion, Employment;and Housing Potentially Liss than Less than No impact significant. ;significant w/ significant Would the prOJCCt: impact mitigation impact measures a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with any applicable land use. plan, policy or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan specific plan. X or zoning ordinance). adopted for purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect ?' X c. Conflict with' any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation X a. The project site is an infill property. 'The. project represents a continuation of development along Petaluma Boulevard North. b. Policies or regulations contained in the. Petaluma General Plan or Zoning Ordinance that have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating ~an, environmental effect. and - that_ apply to the project are limited to the following policies of the General Plan' Transportation Element: Policy 9: Land use decisions shall take into consideration potential traffic impacts. Policy 10: New development shall be required to pay apro -rate: share of needed traffic improvements. The projeefs potential traffic, impacts are addressed in Section .10 and have been determined to be insignificant. The o e t will a a Traffic Mitigation Fee to the'Ci , nor to the issuance of building permits. eP l c pay g. _. h'P a gP s. c. There are no habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans.that apply to the project site. Mitigation Measures/MonitorinQ None.required 2. Populafion, Employment;and Housing a. The project's 15 residents are not considered to be substantial. Many of the tenants will be relocating from elsewhere in Petaluma. • b. -c.The project site is vacant. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None required Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant w/ significant. Would the project: impact mitigation ' impact measures a. Induce substantial population growth' ;in an area, either directly '(for- example;, by proposing new homes and X businesses) or.indireWy (for example. through extension of roads'or other'infrast ucture)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers, of people necessitating the X construction of replacemen,thousing .elsewhere? a. The project's 15 residents are not considered to be substantial. Many of the tenants will be relocating from elsewhere in Petaluma. • b. -c.The project site is vacant. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None required Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 4 3. Geoloay dnd Solis The following answers are based on a geotechriical investigation report. (Geotechnical Investigation Report, Boulevard Apartments, Kleinfelder, Inc., September 10, 2003) that was prepared for the subject property, which concluded that, from .a geotechnical engineering standpoint, the site can be used for the proposed project.. a. The project,site is not °.located within am Alquist- Priolo Earthquake , ,Fault�Zone and no known active faults traverse the site. Therefore, the risk of "ground ruptuze within the limits of the site,is considered to be' low: It is reasonable to assume that during the life of the proposed development, it will be subjected to at least one moderate to severe earthquake that could produce potentiallym . - daaging ground "shaking at the site. Further, it is anticipated that the subject site will, periodically experience small-to-moderate magnitude earthquakes. Seismic- related.ground,failure is notanticipated `at the project site. b. The entire project site will be covered with buildings, paving, walkways or landscaping; no exposed soil will remain. • c. The project site's underlying geologic unit and soil are not unstable and are not anticipated to. become unstable. • d. 'Me-surface soils;,and bedrock encountered during borings atthe are moderately to highly expansive or plastic. e. The site's upper soils will be removed and replaced with imported' fill. However, there are no adverse impacts anticipated from these actions. Potentially L.ess.than Less than No impact significant significant wi significant Would the project: impact miligation impact measures a. Expose people. or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: a Rupture .of a'known earthquakee fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by °the State Geologist for the area or based X on other substantial "evidence of aknown fault? • Strong scismic'ground.shaking? X • Seismic- related.ground failure, including liquefaction? X b. Result iw substantial ;sod erosion or theaoss:of topsoil? X c. Be located on a,geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of on- or off :site landslide lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or X collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial' X risks to liferor property? e. Result in' disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering�ofthc- soil? X_ f. Change topography orground surface relief features? X g. Destroy,,. cover` or modify any unique geologic or physical features? X h% Increase wind or water erosion of soils, either on- or off- site? X i. Result in changes in siltation, 'deposition or erosion, which may modify the;channel of a`river or stream? X The following answers are based on a geotechriical investigation report. (Geotechnical Investigation Report, Boulevard Apartments, Kleinfelder, Inc., September 10, 2003) that was prepared for the subject property, which concluded that, from .a geotechnical engineering standpoint, the site can be used for the proposed project.. a. The project,site is not °.located within am Alquist- Priolo Earthquake , ,Fault�Zone and no known active faults traverse the site. Therefore, the risk of "ground ruptuze within the limits of the site,is considered to be' low: It is reasonable to assume that during the life of the proposed development, it will be subjected to at least one moderate to severe earthquake that could produce potentiallym . - daaging ground "shaking at the site. Further, it is anticipated that the subject site will, periodically experience small-to-moderate magnitude earthquakes. Seismic- related.ground,failure is notanticipated `at the project site. b. The entire project site will be covered with buildings, paving, walkways or landscaping; no exposed soil will remain. • c. The project site's underlying geologic unit and soil are not unstable and are not anticipated to. become unstable. • d. 'Me-surface soils;,and bedrock encountered during borings atthe are moderately to highly expansive or plastic. e. The site's upper soils will be removed and replaced with imported' fill. However, there are no adverse impacts anticipated from these actions. Bo.ulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No.. 03 -ZOA -0405' -CR Page 5 f The site is essentially level: g The site does not support any unique geologic'or,. physical features: h. See response to (b.,Yabove. I . The site is not located.near a river or stream. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Adopting the following eoridtions of approval as part of the Unit Development Plan will reduce all potentially - significant impacts to a level of non- significance. G -L. The design of all earthwork, cuts and, fills„ drainage, pavements; utilities, foundations and structural components shall conform with the specifications and criteria contained in the geotechnical report, as approved by the City Engineer. G -2. Foundation and structural design, for buildings shall meet the Uniform Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e., reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing parapets, etc.). G -3. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall obtain ;a geotechnical engineer to review the final . project plans. and specifications to 'determine if ,they are consistent with the recommendations as outlined in the report and observe grading, compaction, and foundation excavations to verify that conditions are as anticipated and to modify recommendations if wan-anted. The 'geotechnical engineer shall sign the improvement plans and certify the design as conforming to the. specifications. 64. Construction and improvement plans shall be reviewed for conformance with the geotechnical 'specifications by the Engineering Section of the Community ;Development Department and the Chief Building Official prior to - issuance of grading, or building permits and/or advertising for bids on public • improvement projects. Additional soils information maybe required by the Chief Building Inspector during the plan check of building plans in accordance with Title 17 and 20 of the Petaluma Municipal Code. G -5. The geotechnical engineer shall inspect the construction work and: shall certify to the City, prior- to acceptance of the improvements or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, thaf the improvements have been constructed' in accordance with the geotechnical specifications. G -6. All earthwork,, grading, trenching, backfilling, ,and compaction operations shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance ( #. 1046; Title- 20, Chapter 20.04 of the Petaluma Mu. nicipal Code) and Grading and Erosion `Control Ordinance 41576, Title 17, Chapter 17.31 of the Petaluma Municipal Code). G -7. The applicant shall submit an Erosion and. Sediment Control Plan prepared by a registered professional engineer as an integral part of 'the grading plan. The Erosion and Sediment: Control Plan shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Division and Engineering Section, prior to issuance of a grading permit. 'The Plan shall include `:temporary erosion control measures to be used during. excavation for foundations, and other grading- operations at the site to prevent discharge of sediment ;and contaminants into the drainage system. The Erosion. and Sediment .Control Plan shall 'include the following:measures as applicable: a. Throughout the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be minimized and the existing vegetation shall be retained .to the extent possible to reduce soil erosion. All construction and grading activities, including short=term needs (equipment staging areas, storage areas and :field office locations) shall minimize'the amount . of land area disturbed. Wheneverpossible, existing disturbed areas shall be used for such purposes. b. All drainage -ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall be protected, from silt and sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt fences, diversion berms, and check dams. All exposed surface areas shall • be mulched and reseeded, and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected with hay mulch and/or erosion control blankets 'as "appropriate:. C. Material and equipment: for implementation of erosion control measures :shall be on -site by October 1 st. All grading activity shall be completed by Octobef 15th prior to the on -set of the rainy season, Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 6 with all disturbed areas stabilized -and re- vegetated by October 3 -1st. Upon approval by the Petaluma City Engineer extensions for short -term grading may be allowed. The. Engineering Section in • conjunction with any specially permitted rainy :season grading may require special erosion control measures. G -8. All public and private improvements shall be - subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the approved improvement plans, _prior to their acceptance by the ,City. 4. Air Quality a. — c.: There may be some °temporary-degradation, of air quality during the construction phase of this project; however, with the application. of the City's standard mitigation measures listed below; these impacts' will be,shoit - term and less than significant. d. There are no substantial pollutant concentrations in the project vicinity. e.: None of the project activities. are, anticipated to create objectionable odors. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring •. The Applicant shall incorporate the following Best Management .Practices into the construction and improvement and ^:clearly indicates these provisions in the specifications: The construction contractor shall.incorporate these measures intothe; required Erosion and. Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive, dust and exhaust emissions during construction. a. Grading: and construction equipment. operated' during construction activities shall. be properly mufflered and maintained .to minimize emissions. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use: b. Exposed soils shall be watered periodically during_ construction; a minimum, of twice daily: The frequency of watering shall be increased if wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Only purchased city water or reclaimed -water shall be used for this purpose. Responsibility for watering, to include weekends and holidays-when work is not in progress. c. 'Construction'sites involving earthwork shall provide for 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 of mud and dust carried' onto the street by construction vehicles. Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant-w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact measures a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b. Violate.any air quality. standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected.air quality violation? X c. Result in , a cumulatively considerable net :increase of any criteri a `pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air X. quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed;quantitative'thresholds for `ozone precursors)? d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X' c. Create objectionableodors meeting a substantiaknumber of people? X a. — c.: There may be some °temporary-degradation, of air quality during the construction phase of this project; however, with the application. of the City's standard mitigation measures listed below; these impacts' will be,shoit - term and less than significant. d. There are no substantial pollutant concentrations in the project vicinity. e.: None of the project activities. are, anticipated to create objectionable odors. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring •. The Applicant shall incorporate the following Best Management .Practices into the construction and improvement and ^:clearly indicates these provisions in the specifications: The construction contractor shall.incorporate these measures intothe; required Erosion and. Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive, dust and exhaust emissions during construction. a. Grading: and construction equipment. operated' during construction activities shall. be properly mufflered and maintained .to minimize emissions. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use: b. Exposed soils shall be watered periodically during_ construction; a minimum, of twice daily: The frequency of watering shall be increased if wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Only purchased city water or reclaimed -water shall be used for this purpose. Responsibility for watering, to include weekends and holidays-when work is not in progress. c. 'Construction'sites involving earthwork shall provide for 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 of mud and dust carried' onto the street by construction vehicles. Boulevard Apts. lritial. Study - File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 7 d. During excavation activities, haul trucks used to transport soil shall utilize tarps or other similar covering devices to reduce dust emissions. e. Post - construction re- vegetation, repaving I 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. f. Applicant shall designate a;person with authority to require. increased watering to monitor the dust and erosion control program proVI&name and phone number to the City of Petaluma prior to issuance .of grading permits. g. If applicable, the applicant_ shall obtain operating permits from the Bay Area Air' Quality Management District. and shall. provide evidence of compliance prior to requesting a Certificate of Occupancy. The Planning Department. and/or Building Division shall' verify that °the . applicant has obtained an operating permit and that the facilities conform to the permit requirements prior to authorizing the Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Hydrology and Water Quality • • Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant, significant w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact measures a. Violate any water quality standards 'or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater` supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there X would be:a net deficit in aquifer volume,ora lowering of the local groundwater table level? c. Substantially alter the existing draiitage°pattern of the site or area, .including -through the alteration of''the course of a X stream, or river, in a manner which would result in substantial!erosionorsiltation.on- or off- -site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage ;pattern of the site or area including through, the alteration of "the course of 'a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate .or amount X of surface runoff in a manner which would result_in flooding on- or'off- site? e. Create or contribute iiutoff water which would exceed the capacity of exis"i or planned�storjnwater drainage. systems X or provide�substantial,,additional "sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degradekwater quality? X g. Place housing within a 100 -year, flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or .Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood•hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year flood area structures which X would impede or redirect.flood;flows? L Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death, involving 'flooding.`including flooding as a X result of the failure of a,le ee or -dam ?' j, Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? X Boulevard Apts. Initial Study -'File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 8 a. Any sediments or pollutants. generated by construction activities will be contained through the mitigation . measures listed below. • b. The project will not use,groundwater. The amount of ground.that will be covered by the project's buildings and paving is not substantial. c. The project site is not located near a stream or river. d. See response to (c) above. e. All anticipated project run-off can be accommodated by the existing storm drainage system, f, Se response, io "(a) above. g. The project site is not located «ithin a 100 -year flood hazard area. h. See response to (g) above. I . The project site is not located within an inundation area. j. The project site is not located within an area that could be affected by seiclie, tsunami or'mudflow. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring H -1.. All construction activities shall be ,performed in a manner that minimizes the sediment and/or,' pollutants. 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 Engineering Section,. prior to issuance of °grading or building permits. a. The applicant shall designate construction staging areas and areas foratorage of any.hazardous. ;materials (i.e., motor oi fuels, paints, etc.) used during construction on the improvements plans. All's construction , staging areas shall be located away from° any drainage areas to. prevent runoff from construction ,areas from entering into' drainage system. Areas designated for of hazardous ,materials shall include proper containment features to prevent contaminants from entering drainage areas in the event of a spill or leak. b. No debris, soil, silt, ,sane, cement concrete or washings .thereof. or other construction related materials or wastes, oil or petroleum products or other°,organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter `any drainage .system. All discarded material' 'washings and 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 m the�specificat' ns: H2. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive Urban'Runoff Control Plan for review and approval of the Engineering Section prior to the ,approval of improvements plans or the issuance of grading or building permits. At a minimum; the plan shall: (a) identify specific types and sources of sto water pollutants; (b) determine the Iocation, and "nature of potential ;impacts; and (c) specify and incorporate appropriate control measures into the project design and; improvement plans. Construct plans shall be :reviewed by the City Planning Department for conformance .with the Urban Runoff Control Plan priorto approval of improvement plans or issuance of grading or .building ,permits. City inspectors shall inspect the improvements and verify compliance to acceptance'of improvements Or issuance ofa Certificate of Occupancy. Urban Runoff Control Programs shall include the following''as appropriate: a. Where practical, street runoff should`be conveyed through;wegetated swales or - retained in small detention basin or swales which serve to filter and absorb sediment and chemical constituents in urban :runoff prior to entering a stream channel or storm drain. Alternatively, "filters" of oil and contaminants -mav be incorporated into the design of storm drain inlets where an annual maintenance program is 'provided. b. Pesticides and fertilizers -shall not be applied to public landscape areas, or any maintenance access -way duringthe rainy season (October 15th- Apri130th). H -3. The ,applicant shall submit a detailed grading and drainage, plan for review and approval' by the City Engineering: and. Planning Departments prior to approval of.an. improvement plan or a.grading or building Boulevard.Apts. Initial Study.- File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 9 • permit. The project grading and all site drainage improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with..the City of Petaluma Engineering Department's "Standard Specifications." The drainage .plans shall include supporting calculations of storm drain and culvert size using acceptable engineering methods. All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain, system design shall, be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. H -4. The applicant shall pay the City's, Storm Drainage Impact Fee,. Drainage Impact Fees shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance: and a fair share portion'shall be paid for each residential unit prior to final inspection of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. H -5. A public storm drain system shall be constructed in Grey Street. and shall be designed to include future applicable upstream development. 'The storm drain system design shall be reviewed and approved by the Sonoma County Water Agency. 6. Biological Resources • a. - f. O The project site is located in the midst of an urbanized and largely developed area. The subject property has little or no notable vegetation and is covered' with weeds and grasses. The site has been disked in the past and there is no standing water on the property. No significant impact to plant species, agricultural crops, or animal species or diversity has been identified. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None required Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact measures 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 X regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S., Fish and Wildlife Service? b, Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or-regulatons, or by the'California X Department of Fish and `Game .or US " Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by ScWon 404 of the'Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh: vernal` pool, coastal, X etc.) through ' direct removal, filling. hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere. substantially with the movement of any native resident or .nugratory ,. fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local ,policies or ,.ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or X ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community. Conservation Plan X or other approved local, regional,, or state habitat conservation :plan? a. - f. O The project site is located in the midst of an urbanized and largely developed area. The subject property has little or no notable vegetation and is covered' with weeds and grasses. The site has been disked in the past and there is no standing water on the property. No significant impact to plant species, agricultural crops, or animal species or diversity has been identified. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None required Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Pag A 0 7. Noise • a. Petaluma. General Plan Figure 11 -1, Land Use/NOISe Compatibility Standards . indicates - that multi - family residential land uses are considered normally acceptable in noise environments. of 60 dBA Ldn or less. Noise environments.ranging from 60 dBA Ldn to 70 dBA Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for multi= family residential., land uses. Between, 70 dBA Ldn, to 75 dBA Ldn, multi - family residential land. uses would be considered normally unacceptable. In noise environments exceeding 75dBA Ldn, these types of land uses would . be considered ,clearly unacceptable. Multi - family housing in California is subject to the environmental noise limits set forth an Title 24, Part 2; of the State Building Code. The noise limit is a maximum, interior noise level of 45Ldn. Where 'exterior. noise levels exceed 60 Ldn, a report must be submitted with the building plans describing the noise control measures that have been incorporated into the design to meet the noise limits. Noise generated by vehicular traffic on Petaluma Boulevard North likely falls within' the 60 to, 70 dBA Ldn, therefore, noise mitigation measures are required for the living areas of'Bulding 3, which is:7ocated adjacent to the street. Assuming typical California construction methods, the interior of the residential units in. Building would be' exposed to future noise levels that are approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels. , To achieve the necessary- sound transmission loss required to meet the City of Petaluma's. interior noise standard and the requirements of Title 24, Part 2 of the California Building Code, a.forced air mechanical ventilation, system will be required in conjunction with sound -rated windows to .maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 .dBA Ldn. At the time building plans are developed for the project, they Are to reviewed by an acoustical pecialst to determine the. noise insulation features to be included in the project's design to maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 dBA Ldn: A patio area proposed on the ,west side of Building 3 will be shielded from traffic noise by the intervening building therefore noise levels are expected to be within acceptable_ I evels.. b. Building 3 residents may be exposed to infrequent vibrations from passing trucks on Petaluma Boulevard. North, however these vibrations are not expected to be excessive. c. Although an incremental increase in noise will result from the conversion of the currently vacant site into a. residential site, the project''s activities are not expected to significantly increase the ambient`noise levels in the vicinity, d. Temporary increase' in noise levels will occur during construction due to the use of heavy construction equipment. However, this noise will be short-temi. 0 Potentially Less than Less.than No impact significant significant w/ significant Would the project result in: impact mitigation impact measures a. Exposure of persoris to or generation of noise levels in excess :of standards established in the local general plan or X noise-ordinance, or applicable standards of "other agencies? b. Exposure of persons `to or generation of excessive X groundbome, vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without. the X project? d. A substantial temporary or . periodic increase In ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the project? • a. Petaluma. General Plan Figure 11 -1, Land Use/NOISe Compatibility Standards . indicates - that multi - family residential land uses are considered normally acceptable in noise environments. of 60 dBA Ldn or less. Noise environments.ranging from 60 dBA Ldn to 70 dBA Ldn are considered conditionally acceptable for multi= family residential., land uses. Between, 70 dBA Ldn, to 75 dBA Ldn, multi - family residential land. uses would be considered normally unacceptable. In noise environments exceeding 75dBA Ldn, these types of land uses would . be considered ,clearly unacceptable. Multi - family housing in California is subject to the environmental noise limits set forth an Title 24, Part 2; of the State Building Code. The noise limit is a maximum, interior noise level of 45Ldn. Where 'exterior. noise levels exceed 60 Ldn, a report must be submitted with the building plans describing the noise control measures that have been incorporated into the design to meet the noise limits. Noise generated by vehicular traffic on Petaluma Boulevard North likely falls within' the 60 to, 70 dBA Ldn, therefore, noise mitigation measures are required for the living areas of'Bulding 3, which is:7ocated adjacent to the street. Assuming typical California construction methods, the interior of the residential units in. Building would be' exposed to future noise levels that are approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels. , To achieve the necessary- sound transmission loss required to meet the City of Petaluma's. interior noise standard and the requirements of Title 24, Part 2 of the California Building Code, a.forced air mechanical ventilation, system will be required in conjunction with sound -rated windows to .maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 .dBA Ldn. At the time building plans are developed for the project, they Are to reviewed by an acoustical pecialst to determine the. noise insulation features to be included in the project's design to maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 dBA Ldn: A patio area proposed on the ,west side of Building 3 will be shielded from traffic noise by the intervening building therefore noise levels are expected to be within acceptable_ I evels.. b. Building 3 residents may be exposed to infrequent vibrations from passing trucks on Petaluma Boulevard. North, however these vibrations are not expected to be excessive. c. Although an incremental increase in noise will result from the conversion of the currently vacant site into a. residential site, the project''s activities are not expected to significantly increase the ambient`noise levels in the vicinity, d. Temporary increase' in noise levels will occur during construction due to the use of heavy construction equipment. However, this noise will be short-temi. 0 BoulevardApts. Initial Study - File No. 03- ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 1 1 Mitigation Measures/Monitoring • N -1 All construction activities shall comply with applicable Performance Standards in the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code, including the following: a. All construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma, unless a permit is first secured from the City Manager (or his/her designee) for additional hours. b. There shall be no start up of'machines nor equipment prior to 8:00 a.m., Monday through Friday; no delivery of materials ;nor equipment prior to 7: -30 a.m. nor past 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and no servicing of equipment past 6:45. p.m, Monday through Friday. Plans submitted for city permits shall include the =language above. C. 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. �. All 'construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned:off when not in use. The applicant shall designate.aTroject Manager with authority to implement the mitigation measures who will be responsible for. responding -to-any complaints from the neighborhood, prior to issuance of a building/grading permit. The Project Manager. shall determine the cause of noise complaints (e.g. starting too early,. faulty muffler, etc.) and shall. take prompt action to correct the problem. ® N -2 All residential units shall be constructed using appropriate construction techniques and materials to achieve compliance with the noise standard for interior living area (45 dBA maximum noise level) and the. General Plan standard for exterior yards (.60 dBA). A forced air :mechanical ventilation system shall be installed in conjunction with sound -rated windows. as needed to maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 dBA Ldn. The applicant shall provide an acoustical report prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer "that demonstrates that the proposed building construction will meet both interior and exterior noise standards. !Said report shall be submitted by the applicant.for•reve.w and approval of the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. Visual Quality and_Aesthefics a. 'The site is not located within.a scenic vista. b. The site is not located in an area designated as a scenic resource or that requires scenic protection. Potentially Less than. Less than No impact sigruificani significant.w/ significant Would' the project. impact. mitigation impact measures a. Have a substantial.adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources including, but not hinted to. trees; rock outcroppings, and historic bidldiiigs X within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade thcxxisting visual character or quality of site and its surroundings? - X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which. would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X a. 'The site is not located within.a scenic vista. b. The site is not located in an area designated as a scenic resource or that requires scenic protection. Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 12 c. The project's preliminary, building designs have been favorably - reviewed by the Site Plan and Architectural. , Review Committee. They will receive final review and approval following approval of the rezoning and Unit • Development'Plan. d. Outdoor ,lights installed .in .conjunction with the development will be reviewed by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Mitigation Measures/Mon' V -1 The, project's outdoor, - lighting plan, including the proposed design and location of lighting fixtures, shall be subject to approval by the ,Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee: V -2 All exterior- lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and. shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent properties. Only low - intensity light standards: and/or wall- mounted lights 'shall be used (no flood lights). Lights attached to buildings shall provide a "soft wash "' of light against. the wall and shall generate' no direct .glare -. Parking lot and'security lighting shall be "typical of lighting ;for ulti - family uses. 1. Hazards'&-.Haaardous Materials 0 a. None of the project activities are expected to involve hazardous materials. b. See response to (a.) above. c. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Level One Environmental Site Assessment of Property Located at 945 Petaluma Blvd North, Lumina 'Technologies, November • 5, 1997) and an Assessment Update (Phase I Environmental Site Assessmen P U date Boulevard Apartments, Kleinfelder, Inc_, June 4, 2002) were prepared for the subject pro The analyses concluded that the project site is not included in any federal, state or local regulatory agencies' databases of 'businesses and properties that use, store, or release hazardous rhaterialsl or waste, or are: know locations. of a release of hazardous substances. A site reconnaissance did not reveal evidence of the use, storage, or disposal, of hazardous chemicals at the site. Although the databases ;indicate that five releases of :petroleum hydrocarbons have occurred within an approximately 1000 46ot' radius of the site, it was concluded that the chance of groundwater contamination . beneath the project site is remote and that the releases do not represent a- Recognized Environmental' Condition as • defined'by the ASTM Standard. Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant w/ significant Would;the project: impact mitigation impact measures a. Create:a significant hazard to the public or the environment . through the routine transport use, or di§posal of hazardous X materials? b. Create a' significant, hazard to the. or the environment. through reasonably foreseeable upset and, accident conditions involving the release of hazardous niaterials into r X the environment? c. 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 X hazard to the or the environment? d. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation X Plan? e 0 a. None of the project activities are expected to involve hazardous materials. b. See response to (a.) above. c. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Level One Environmental Site Assessment of Property Located at 945 Petaluma Blvd North, Lumina 'Technologies, November • 5, 1997) and an Assessment Update (Phase I Environmental Site Assessmen P U date Boulevard Apartments, Kleinfelder, Inc_, June 4, 2002) were prepared for the subject pro The analyses concluded that the project site is not included in any federal, state or local regulatory agencies' databases of 'businesses and properties that use, store, or release hazardous rhaterialsl or waste, or are: know locations. of a release of hazardous substances. A site reconnaissance did not reveal evidence of the use, storage, or disposal, of hazardous chemicals at the site. Although the databases ;indicate that five releases of :petroleum hydrocarbons have occurred within an approximately 1000 46ot' radius of the site, it was concluded that the chance of groundwater contamination . beneath the project site is remote and that the releases do not represent a- Recognized Environmental' Condition as • defined'by the ASTM Standard. Boulevard Ants. Initial:Studv - File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR . Pacie 13 d. None of the proposed site' improvements are expected Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an • adopted emergencyresponse�plan ,or emergency evacuation plan. Mitigation Measures/Monitor ns None are required 10. Tran • a. A study that evaluated the potential traffic impacts of the 'project (Tragic Impact Study for Boulevard Apartments, TJKM Transportation .Consultants, August 2003) estimated that the project would generate 84 daily trips during a weekday, with six trips during the morning peak hour and eight trips, during the evening peak hour, based on a trip generation.. rate for one- bedroom apartment, unit. Given. the current traffic volumes at the study intersections (Petaluma Boulevard. North and Sycamore Lane /Shasta Avenue, Magnolia Avenue/W. Payran Street, and project driveway), thesee additional' trips do not represent a substantial increase. The number of trips generated by the project is probably substantially lower than the number would be generated by commercial development of the project site. Given the fact that many of the, project residents will not own a car 'or drive, the study also used the. "Elderly Housing Attached" land' use category to generate a more realistic estimate of traffnc_ generated by the project, which resulted in 5,5 daily trips, with one trip during the morning peak hour and two during the evening peak hour. However, the traffic analysis :used the Higher trip generation to develop a "worst case" scenario. b. The traffic study concluded that the levels of service (LOS) at the three intersections studied would be unchanged at LOS B, C, and A, respectively, if .project traffic were to be added. All three 'intersections, therefore, would continue to operate at or above; LOS C, which is considered to be an. acceptable service level for signalized intersection operations. c. The project's design does.'not include hazardous features or incompatible uses. d. The project's interiorcirculation, including an on -site turnaround area for emergency vehicles, has been reviewed and approved by the Petaluma Fire Department. • c. At a 16 -unit apartment complex similar to the proposed project, Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments in Novato, only six of the 16 residents own cars. The applicant expects that tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a similar pattern regarding ear ownership. The project site is well -served by public transportation and is close to shopping and other services. Only a few residents are likely to own cars at initial occupancy. As time goes by, a few more residents may acquire cars since residents will have more affordable rent. However, experience at Potentially Less than Less than No significant significant w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact Measures a. Cause an increase'in traffic which is substantial in relation X to the existing traffic load and capacity of A_hc 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 X service standard established by the' 'county congestion management agency for designated roads or, highways? c. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., X. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access? X e.. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X f Conflict with adopted policies,, plans or "programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, X bicycle racks)? a. A study that evaluated the potential traffic impacts of the 'project (Tragic Impact Study for Boulevard Apartments, TJKM Transportation .Consultants, August 2003) estimated that the project would generate 84 daily trips during a weekday, with six trips during the morning peak hour and eight trips, during the evening peak hour, based on a trip generation.. rate for one- bedroom apartment, unit. Given. the current traffic volumes at the study intersections (Petaluma Boulevard. North and Sycamore Lane /Shasta Avenue, Magnolia Avenue/W. Payran Street, and project driveway), thesee additional' trips do not represent a substantial increase. The number of trips generated by the project is probably substantially lower than the number would be generated by commercial development of the project site. Given the fact that many of the, project residents will not own a car 'or drive, the study also used the. "Elderly Housing Attached" land' use category to generate a more realistic estimate of traffnc_ generated by the project, which resulted in 5,5 daily trips, with one trip during the morning peak hour and two during the evening peak hour. However, the traffic analysis :used the Higher trip generation to develop a "worst case" scenario. b. The traffic study concluded that the levels of service (LOS) at the three intersections studied would be unchanged at LOS B, C, and A, respectively, if .project traffic were to be added. All three 'intersections, therefore, would continue to operate at or above; LOS C, which is considered to be an. acceptable service level for signalized intersection operations. c. The project's design does.'not include hazardous features or incompatible uses. d. The project's interiorcirculation, including an on -site turnaround area for emergency vehicles, has been reviewed and approved by the Petaluma Fire Department. • c. At a 16 -unit apartment complex similar to the proposed project, Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments in Novato, only six of the 16 residents own cars. The applicant expects that tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a similar pattern regarding ear ownership. The project site is well -served by public transportation and is close to shopping and other services. Only a few residents are likely to own cars at initial occupancy. As time goes by, a few more residents may acquire cars since residents will have more affordable rent. However, experience at Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 7ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 14 Margaret Duncan Green Apartments indicates that even after six years, less than half of the residents will own - cars. Therefore, the 12 on -site parking spaces should. adequately accommodate both resident and visitor vehicles. •" f: By siting.the,project near a bus stop that provides frequent local and regional service,, the project will make use of alte' mative:tra nsportation. Mitigation Mcasures11V1onitoririg None are required 11. Public" Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts Potentially Less than Less than No impact associated with the provision , of new or physically altered s si g"' sig wl ! significant governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered impact mitigation impact �. governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause measures X significant' environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable " service ratios response times or other performance 'objectives for °any of the publicsservices: X a. Fire protection? ' X b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X d. Parks? X e. Other public facilities? X a. Additional fire service calls may occur as a result of the. project. However, the prgect will be subject 'to the payment of Community Facilities fees, in accordance with Chapter 17.14, of the Municipal Code, to offset the `impacts to public facilities. b. An on -site manager who will reside in the project will provide some self- policing within, the community. Additional police service calls. may occur as; a result of the project. However, the. project will be subject: to the payment of .Community Facilities fees, in accordance with Chapter- 17.14; of the: Municipal Code, to offset the impacts to public facilities. c. The project is not expected to generate any students d. The project will pay Park:and,R'ecreational Facilities'Fee and a Park and'Recreation Land Improvements Fee to help offset any increased; use of parks or. recreational facilities by the project residents. However, many of the residents are alreadYpetalumaxesidents. e... There are no other publicfacilities that are likely to be impacted! by the project. Mitigation Measures/Momtorim? None are required. 12. Recreation • • Potentially significant impact Less than significant w/ mitigation measures Less than significant impact No impact, a. Would `the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur X or be accelerated? b. Does the project include -recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational ,.facilitiIes which X might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? • • Boulevard Apts. Initial Study- F,l'e No. 03 -ZOA -0405 -CR Page 15 a. The use of park. and recreational facilities by 15 residents would not substantially contribute to the physical • deterioration of these facilities. b. The project does not propose or require recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. • Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None.are required. 13. Utilities Infrastructure a. The project is not expected .to generate wastewater that will require special'treatment. b. The amount of wastewater expected to be generated, by the project is. consistent with the service needs: anticipated by the Petaluma, General: Plan and will; not require the construction of new treatment facilities or the expansion of- existing facilities. c. The amount of runoff expected to.. be generated by the project can be adequately accommodated by the city's existing storm water drainage facilities. d. Water can be supplied to the project from existing entitlements. c. See answer to (b.) above. f. The amount of solid waste expected to be generated by the project is-consistent with the service needs anticipated by the Petaluma General Plan. Residents will be given the opportunity to participate in recycling programs. - 0 g. The project will only generate solid waste typical of multi- family residential uses. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required. Potentially Less than Lewthan No impact significant significant w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact measures a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality ControY.Board? X b. Require or result in the construction of a new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant X environmental effects? c. Require or result .in the �consiruction of ;new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing" facilities, the construction of which could cause - significant environmental X effects? d. Have insufficient water supplies :available to. serve the project from existing entitlements needed? X e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the ,project that it has X inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill withsufficient pemutted capacity to accommodate the project's solid wastetdisposal needs ?' X g, Comply with federal, state; and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X a. The project is not expected .to generate wastewater that will require special'treatment. b. The amount of wastewater expected to be generated, by the project is. consistent with the service needs: anticipated by the Petaluma, General: Plan and will; not require the construction of new treatment facilities or the expansion of- existing facilities. c. The amount of runoff expected to.. be generated by the project can be adequately accommodated by the city's existing storm water drainage facilities. d. Water can be supplied to the project from existing entitlements. c. See answer to (b.) above. f. The amount of solid waste expected to be generated by the project is-consistent with the service needs anticipated by the Petaluma General Plan. Residents will be given the opportunity to participate in recycling programs. - 0 g. The project will only generate solid waste typical of multi- family residential uses. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required. Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA -0405 =CR Page 16 14. Mineral Resources a. Soil studies conducted as part of the geotechnical investigation did not reveal any valuable'mineral resources. b. The project site,has not been' delineated as a,locally- important mineral resource recovery site on any such .,plans. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required. 15: Cultural Resources Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant w/ significant Would the project: impact mitigation impact measures a, Result in the. loss or availability of a known mineral resource: that would be, of value to the region and the }{ residents or the state? X b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important _ mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local,,general X plan, specific plan or other land.use.plan? a. Soil studies conducted as part of the geotechnical investigation did not reveal any valuable'mineral resources. b. The project site,has not been' delineated as a,locally- important mineral resource recovery site on any such .,plans. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required. 15: Cultural Resources a. - d. A cultural resources study (A Cultural Resources Study of a. Parcel at 945 Petaluma Boulevard North, Petaluma, Sonoma County, California, Tom Origer & Associates, February 1998) prepared for the project' site reported that archival research: revealed that no previously= recorded cultural resources were present on the site. A field survey conducted as _part of the study also found no prehistoric or historic resources within the project site. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required.. 16. - Agricultural Resources Potentially Less than Less than No impact significant significant w( significant Would; the project: impact mitigation impact: measures a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of -a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines X § 15064.5? X b. Cause a substantial, adverse change;in the significance of an _ archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines }{ , §15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a, unique paleontological resource or site - or unique;geologic feature? X d. Disturb any, `human remains, including those interred ;outside of formal,cemeteries? X a. - d. A cultural resources study (A Cultural Resources Study of a. Parcel at 945 Petaluma Boulevard North, Petaluma, Sonoma County, California, Tom Origer & Associates, February 1998) prepared for the project' site reported that archival research: revealed that no previously= recorded cultural resources were present on the site. A field survey conducted as _part of the study also found no prehistoric or historic resources within the project site. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring None are required.. 16. - Agricultural Resources r • Potentially Lessithan Less than No impact ' significant significant w/ significant Would the:,project: impact.. mitigation. impact measures a. Convert Prime Farmland Unique FFarmland_or Farm and of Statewide Importance. (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland IVlapping.aAd Monitoring' X Program of the California Resources Agency; to non - agricultural , r • Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page..`17 . • C] b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a the 'habitat of fish or wildlife species, ,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - X Williamson Act contract? sustaining levels, threaten to eli unate:a plant or< animal community, reduce the number or restrict X the range of a rare or .endangered plant 'or animal or eliminate important examples of the major c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which , periods of California history or prehistory? due to their location or nature, could result in. conversion of ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X farmland to.non- agricultural use? viewed in connection with the effects 46f past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future. projects)? a. The project site is not classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. b. The project site is not subject to a'Williamson Act contract. c. T h e p rojectsite is an urban infill property arrd is not contiguous to any agricultural land. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Noneare'required. 17. Mandatory Findings of'Sianificance Yes No a. Does the project have the potential' 'to degradethe quality of the environment, substantially reduce the 'habitat of fish or wildlife species, ,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eli unate:a plant or< animal community, reduce the number or restrict X the range of a rare or .endangered plant 'or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the: project have impacts that :are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X viewed in connection with the effects 46f past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future. projects)? c. Does the project have environmental effects` which will cause substantial adverse effects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? a. See Section 6. b. The proposed project is consistent, with the Petaluma General -Plan. 'The, tumulative impacts associated with build - out under the General Plan have been.addressed'by the General Plan EIR. c. See Sections 1 through 16. M Mfflgcafion Measures and Monitoring Mitigation Measures: Air Quality The Applicant shall' ;�rico_ orate the followm pp rp g Best Management Practices into the construction and improvement plans and'. clearly indicates 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. a. Grading and constructibmequipment operated during construction activities shall. be properly muiflered and maintained to minimize emissions. Equipment shall be turned off when;not in use. b. Exposed soils shall 'be "watered periodically during .construction a minimum of twice daily. The frequency of watering, shall be increased if wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Only purchased city water or reclaimed water shall be used for this purpose. Responsibility for watering to include weekends and • holidays when work is in progress. Boulevard Apts. Initial Study -File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 18 c. Construction sites involving earthwork shall provide for a gravel 1pad 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 carriedionto the street by construction vehicles. d. During excavation activities, haul trucks used to transport soil shalt utilize tarps or other similar covering devices to reduce dust ;emissions. e. 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 improverrients.or issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. f Applicant shall. designate a person with authority to require increased watering to monitor the: dust and erosion control program and provide name rand phone number to the City prior - to issuance of grading permits. g. If:applicable; the applicant shall obtain operating permits from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and shall provide evidence of compliance'phor to requesting a Certificate; of Occupancy. The Planning, Department and/or Building Division shall verify that the applicant has obtained, ari operating `permit and that the facilities conform to the permit requirements prior to authorizing the Certif Cate of Occupancy. Geology and Soils 2 . The design components shall conform with the specifications fi lls pavements, utilities, foundations and structural ifications and criteria contained in the geotechnical report, as approved, by the City Engineer. 3. Foundation and .structural, design for buildings shall meet thc Uniform.Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e,,, reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracingparapets, etc.). • 4. Prior to issuance of:a building permit, the applicant shall obtain a geotechnical engineer to review the final project plans and specifications to determine if�ihey are. consistent with the recommendations as ;outlined in the report and observe grading, action , and foundation excavations to verify that conditions are as P- g g, compaction, anticipated and to modify recommendations if warranted. The geotechnical, engineer shall sign . the improvement plans and certify the design as conforming to.the specifications. 5. Construction and improvement plans shall be reviewed for conformance with -the geotechnical specifications by the Engineering Section of'1he Community Development Department and:, the Chief Building, Official prior to issuance of grading . or, building permits and/or advertising_ for bids on public improvement projects. Additional soils information may be required by the Chief Building Inspector during the plan check of building plans in accordance with Title 17 and 20 of the Petaluma Municipal- Code. 6. The geotechnical engineer shall inspect the construction work and' shall certify to the City, prior to, of the improvements or issuance of ;a certificate, bf occupancy, that the improvements. have beer, constructed in accordance with the' geotechnical specifications. 7. All earthwork grading: trenching, baekfilling, and compaction operations shall .b e conducted in accordance with the City 'of' 'Petaluma's ,Subdivision Ordinance (#1046, Title 20, Chapter 20.04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code) and Grading and. Erosion Control :Ordinance # 1576, Title 17, Chapter 1.7.3:1 of the Petaluma Municipal Code). The applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prepared by a registered professional engineer as: an 'integral part of the grading plan. Erosion and ,Sediment Control Plan shall be subject to review and approval. of.the Planning Division and Engineering 'Section, prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Plan shall include temporary erosion controlmeasures to be used during excavation for foundations; and • other 'grading at the site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the drainage system. 'The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall include the following measures as applicable: Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 19 a. Throughout the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be minimized and the existing vegetation shall be hetamed to the extent possible to reduce so l - erosion All construction and grading activities. short -term needs (equipment staging - areas, storage areas, and field office locations) shall minimize the amount of land area disturbed Whenever possible, existing .disturbed areas shall be used for such�purposes. b. All drainage -ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall be protected from silt and sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt ;fences„ diversion berms, and check dams, All exposed surface areas shall be mulched and reseeded and all` cut and fill slopes "shall be protected with hay mulch and/or erosion control blankets as appropriate. C. Material and equipment for implementation of erosion. control measures shall be on -site by October lst. All grading activity shall be completed by October 15th, prior to the on =set of the rainy season, with all disturbed areas stabilized and re- vegetated by October. 31st Upon approval by the Petaluma City Engineer, extensions ;for short -term grading may be allowed.. The Engineering Section in conjunction with any specially permitted rainy sea son grading may require special erosion control measures. 9. All public and private improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the approved improvement plans, priortotheir acceptance by the City. Hydrology and Water Quality 10. All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the sediment and/or pollutants entering directly or indirectly;intolhe storm drain system or ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following provisions into the construction plans and .specifications, to be verified by the Engineering Section, prior to issuance of grading or `building permits. • a. The applicant shall designate construction staging areas and areas for storage of any hazardous materials (i.e., motor oil, fuels, paints, etc_)` used during construction on the improvements plans. All construction staging areas shall be located away from any drainage areas to prevent runoff from construction.areas'from eniering'into the drainage system. Areas designated for'storage of'hazardous materials shall include proper,contamment features to prevent contaminants from entering drainage areas in the event of a spill, or leak. b. No debris, soil, silt, sane,, cement, concrete or washings thereof, or other construction related materials or wastes, oil or,petroleurn products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system:.,A11 discarded material including washings and accidental spills shall be removed and disposed of at an Approved disposal site. The: applicant shall designate appropriate disposal methods an facilities on the construction plans or in the specifications. 11. The applicant. shall :submit a comprehensive Urban Runoff Control Plan for review: and approval. of the Engineering Section prior to the approval of improvements plans or the issuance -of grading= or building Permits. At a minimum, the plan shall: (a) ideritif� specific types and sources of storm water pollutants; (b) determine the 1'ocafion and "nature of potential, impacts; and (c) specify'and incorporate appropriate control measures into the project design and improvement plans. Construction plans shall `be reviewed by the City Planning Department for conformance with the Urban Runoff Control Plan;prior to approval of improvement plans or issuance of grading or building permits. City inspectors shall inspect the improvements and verify compliancelo acceptance of'improvements or issuance�of a Certificate of Occupancy. Urban Runoff Control Programs shall include the following as appropriate` a. Where practical, street runoff should be conveyed through vegetated swales or retained in small detention basin or swales which serve to filter and absorb sediment and chemical constituents in urban runoff prior to entering a stream channel or storm drain. Alternatively, "filters" of oil and • contaminants may be incorporated into the design of stone, drain inlets where an annual. maintenance program is provided. b. Pesticides and fertilizers shall not be applied to public.landscape areas, or any maintenance access - way during the rainy season. (October 15th -April 3Oth). Boulevard Apts-. Initial Study -.File No. 03- ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 20 12. The applicant shall submit a detailed' grading. and drainage plan for review and approval by the City Engineering and Planning Departments pnor,to approval of an improvement plan.,or a grading or :building permit. The project grading and all site drainage . improvements shall be designed, and. constructed in conformance with the Cit} of Petaluma Engineering Department's "Standard Specifications." _The 'drainage plans shall include supporting, calculations of storm drain and culvert size using acceptable engineering methods All hydrologic, h draulic and storm methods. 'y drain system design shall be "subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 13. The applicant shall pay the City's Storm Dramage•;lmpact,Fee. Drainage Impact Fees shall be calculated atthe time of building,permit issuance and a fair. share portion shall' be paid for each residential unit prior to final inspection of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 14. A P ubl c storm drain system shall be .constructed in Grey Street and shall W designed -to include future applicable upstream development. The storm drain system design shall be reviewed and approved by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Noise 15. All construction activities shall comply. with ,applicable Performance Standards in the .Petaluma Zoning Ordinance andr Municipal Code, including the following: a. All. construction activities shall: be limited. to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday `through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5 :00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays. and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma, unless a permit is first secured from the City Manager (or his/her designee) for additional, hours. b. There shall be no start up of machines! nor equipment prior to 8:00' a.m., Monday through Friday;, no delivery of materials nor equipment prior to T30 a.m. nor past 5:00 `p.m., Monday through Friday; and no servicing of equipment past 6:45.p.m., Monday through Friday. Plans submitted for city, permits shall include the language above. C. 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. All constructi on equipment p owered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. The applicant shall designate a Project Manager with authority to implement:the mitigation measures who will be responsible for responding to:anv complaints`; from the neighborhood, prior to issuance of a building/grading; permit.. The Project Manager shall determine the cause of noise comp_ laints (e.g. starting too early,' faulty muffler, etc.) and shall take prompt action to correct the problem. 16. All residential units shall be constructed using appropriate construction techniques -and materials to achieve compliance with the noise standard, for .interior living area (45 dBA maximum noise ,level) and the General Plan standard for exterior yards (60 dBA). A' forced -I air,mechanical ventilation system shall be installed in conjunction with sound -rated windows as; needed to maintain interior noise, levels.at or below 45 dBA Ldn. The applicant shall provi& an acoustical report prepared by a qualified acoustical. engineer that.demonstrates that the g ro osed building construction will meei,both: interior and exterior noise standards: Said report shall P P be submitted by the applica.ntfor review and approval of the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Visual Quality and Aesthetics 17. The project's outdoor. lighting ; plan; including the proposed design and' location of lighting - fixtures, shall be subject to approval by-the Site Plan and.Architectural. Review Committee. Boulevard Apts. Initial Study - File No. 03- ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 21 All exterior lighting . shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and shielded to prevent glare and • intrusion onto adjacent properties. Only ]ow- intensity, light standards and/or wall- mounted lights shall be used (no flood lights). Lights attached to:burldi figs shall provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall and shall generate no direct glare. Parking lot and aec,urity ,lighting. shall be typical of lighting for multi - family uses. 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 permits or approvals of improvements plans. 2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required mitigation measures and conditions into the design and improvements plans and specifications for: the project. 3. The applicant shall notify all employees contractors, and agents involved in the project implementation of mitigation measures and conditions applicable to the project and shall ensure compliance with such measures and conditions. Applicant shall notifyall assigns and transfers of the same. 4. The applicant shall provide for the cost of monitoring of any condition or mitigation measure that involves on- going operations on the site or long -range improvements, such as archaeological resources, etc. Monitoring: The Building Division, Planning Division, Engineering Section and Fire Departments 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 plans, or building permits. 2. The Planning Division shall ensure 'that the applicant has obtained applicable required permits from all • responsible agencies and that the plans and :specifications conform to the permit, requirements prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. 3. Prior to acceptance of improvements or issuance of a Certificate of 'Occupancy,, all improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the project description, permit conditions; and approved development or improvement plans. Construction Measures: 1. The applicant shall designate a project manager with authority to implement all mitigation measures and conditions of approval and provide name, address, and phone numbers to the City prior to issuance of any grading permits and 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 with the approved plans and conditions: of approval. 4. If deemed appropriate by the City, the applicant shall arrange. a pre - construction conference with the construction contractor, City staff 'an&responsible agencies to review the mitigation measures and conditions of approval prior to the issuance of grading.and building permits. Acceptance by Applicant: representative for the project applicant, have reviewed this Initial 'Study ;and hereby agree to incorporate the mitigation measures and monitoring programs identified herein into'the project. /> d Signature "4_ f icant Date a��LU 9 City of Petaluma California Community Development Department Planning Division • as e, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952 Project Name: Boulevard Apartments File Number: 03 -Z A- ®4®5 -CR Address: 945 Petalu Boulevard ''North Reporting /Monitoring Record - Mitigation iMeasures 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 of mitigation measures in conjunction with a project approval which relies upon a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mitigation Measures Geology and Soils ENG BP G -1. The design of all earthwork, cuts and fills, drainage, pavements, utilities, foundations and structural components shall conform with the specifications and; criteria contained in the, geotechnical report, as approved by the City Engineer. BP G -2. Foundation and structural design foi• buildings shall meet the Uniform Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e., reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing parapets, etc.). ENG BP G -3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain a geotechnical engineer to review the final project plans and specifications to determine if they are consistent with the recommendations as outlined in the report and observe ,grading, compaction, 'and foundation excavations to verify that conditions are as anticipated and to modify. recommendations if warranted. The geotechnical engineer shall sign the improvement plans and certify the design as conforming to the specifications. ENG BP G -4. Construction and improvement plans shall be reviewed for conformance with the geotechnical specifications by the Engineering Section, of the Community Development Department and the Chief Building Official prior to. issuance of grading or building permits; and/or advertising for bids on public improvement projects. Additional soils information may be required by the .Chief Building Inspector during the plan check of building plans in accordance with Titles 17 and 20 of the Petaluma Municipal' Code. ENG Co G -5. The geotechnical engineer shall inspect the construction work and shall certify to the City, prior to acceptance of the improvements or I issuance of a certificate of occupancy, ,that "the; improvements have been constructed in accordance with the geotechnical.specifications. FM Final Map ;BP' Building Permit CO Certificate of Occupancy DC . 'During construction SPARC Site Plan ,& Architectural Review Committee LTM LongJdrm-Monitoring Page 1 PD Planning Division FM Fire Marshal. 'ENG Engineering BD Building Division FM Final Map ;BP' Building Permit CO Certificate of Occupancy DC . 'During construction SPARC Site Plan ,& Architectural Review Committee LTM LongJdrm-Monitoring Page 1 Reporting /Monitodng Record of Mitigation Measures Boulevard- Apartments Mitigation Measures ENG co G -6. All earthwork; grading, trenching, backfilling, and compaction operations shall be conducted in accordance with the .City of. Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance ( #1046, Title 20, Chapter 20.04 of 'the Petaluma Municipal Code) ,and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance #1576, Title 17, Chapter 17.31 of the Petaluma .Municipal Code). ENG ep G -7. The applicant ishall submit an Erosion and .Sediment Control Plan prepared, by a registered professional engineer as an integral part , of the grading plan. The Erosion and Sediment. Control Plan shall be subject to.review and approval of the Planning Division and Engineering. Section, prior ao issuance of a ,grading permit. The Plan shall include temporary erosion, control, measures to be used during excavation for foundations, and other grading operations at the. site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the' drainage system. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall include the. following measures as applicable: ENG Dc a. Throughout the construction process, di 'sturbance of ,groundcover shall "be minimized and the existing vegetation shall 'be retained `to the extent possible to reduce soil erosion. All construction and grading activities including short- term'needs (equipment staging areas, storage areas, and field office locati shall minimize the amount of land area .disturbed. Whenever; possible, existing disturbed areas shall be used for -such purposes. ENG Dc b. All drainage -ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall be protected from silt and sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt: fences, diversio berms, and check dams. All exposed surface ;areas .shall be. mulched a reseeded and all cut land fill slopes shall be protected with hay mulch and /or erosion control blankets as appropriate. ENG Dc c. Material and equipment for implementation of erosion ,control measures shall be on -site by October lst. All grading activity. shall be: completed by October 15th prior to the on -.set of the rainy season, with all disturbed +areas stabilized and re- vegetated by October 31 st. Upon approval by the Petaluma City Engineer, extensions for short -term grading may be allowed. The Engineering = Section in conjunction with any specially permitted rainy- season grading may require special erosion control measures. ENG co G -8. All public and private.improvements shall `be'subject to inspection by City staff for compliance. with:the approved improvement plans, prior to their acceptance by the City. ; . Air Quality Erne ar A -1.: The Applicants shall the. following Best Management Practices into the construction and improvement plans and 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. ENG °c a. Gradin g and ' construction equipment operated during construction activities shall be properly muffled and maintained to minimize emissions . q p • E ui ment shall be turned off when not in use. PD Planning Division ,EM Final Map SPARC Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee FM Fire Marshal BP Building Permit LTM Long -Term Monitoring ENG Engineering CO Certificate of Occupancy BD Building Division DC During construction Page 2 R eportinglMonitoringRecord of o. • n Measures Boulevard Ap artments Mitigation Measures J I� H IH I v a 11�111�1I r�'�yI l 1 ENG DC b. Exposed soils shall be watered periodically during construction, a minimum of "twice daily. The frequency of watering shall be increased if Wind speeds exceed IS mph. Only purchased city water or reclaimed water shall be used for this purpose. Responsibility for watering to include weekends'and holidays when work is not in progress. ENG ENG ENG ENG • ENG 0 PD' ,FM ENG BD DC c. Construction sites involving .earthwork shall provide for 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. DC d_. During excavation activities, haul trucks used to, transport soil shall utilize tarps or other similar covering.devices to reduce -dust emissions. co e. 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. DC f. 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. co g. I.f applicable, the applicant shall: obtain operating: permits from the Bay Area Air Quality 'Management .District, and shall provide evidence of compliance ,prior to requesting a Certificate of Occupancy. The Planning Department and/or Building Division shall verify that the applicant has obtained an operating permit and that the facilities conform to the permit requirements prior to authorizing the Certificate of Occupancy. Hydrology and Water Quality H -1. All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the sediment and/or pollutants 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 Engineering Section, prior to issuance of grading or building permits. 13P a. The applicant shall ,designate construction staging areas and areas for storage of any hazardous materials (i.e., motor oil, fuels, paints etc.) used during construction on the improvements plans. 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 contaminants from entering drainage areas in the event of a spill or leak. Planning Division Fire Marshal Engineering Building Division FM Final Map BP Building Permit CO Certificate of Occupancy DC During construction SPARC Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee LTM Long -Term Monitoring Page 3 Reporting /Monitoring Record of Mitigation Measures Boulevard Apartments Mitigation Measures ENG BP b. No debris' soil silt sand, cement concrete or washings thereof, or othe• construction related materials or wastes, oil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system. All discarded. material 'including washings and 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. ENG co H -2. The applicant ;shall pay the City's Storm Drainage Impact Fee. Drainage ,Im P act,Fees shall be calculated.at the time of building permit issuance and a fair share porton'shall be paid:.for each residential unit prior to final inspection of issuance of'a Certificate of Occupancy. Noise N -1 All construction activities shall. comply with applicable'Performance Standards in the Petaluma 'Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code, including the following: BD DC a. All construction activities shall be, limited to 7:00' a.m: to 6 :00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to '5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall be prohibited on. Sundays and all holidays recognized 'by the City of Petaluma, ,unless a permit is first secured from the City Manager (or his/her designee) for additional hours. BD DC b. There shall be no start up of machines nor equipment prior to 8 :00 a.m Monday through Friday; no delivery of materials nor equipment prior t 7:3.0 a.m.'nor past, 5:00 p.m., Monday, through Friday; and no servicing of equipment past 6 :45. p.m., Monday through, Friday. Plans submitted for city permits shall include the language above. BD DC C. 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. BD DC d. All .construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall beTroperly muffled: and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. PD BP e. The applicant Shall.designatea Project Manager with authority to implement the mitigation measures who will be responsible for responding to any complaints from the neighborhood, prior to issuance of ;a building/grading permit. The Project, Manager shall determine the cause of noise complaints (e.g. starting too early, faulty muffler, etc.) and shall' take prompt action to correct the, problem. PD Planning Division FM Final Map SPARC Site Plan & Arch itectural.Review Committee FM Fire Marshal BP Building Permit LTM Long -Term. Monitoring, ENG Engineering 'CO Certificate of Occupancy BD Building, Division DC' During construction Page 4 Reporting /Monitoring Record of Mitigation Measures Boulevard Apartments Mitigation Measures PD BP N -2 All residential units shall be constructed using appropriate construction techniques and materials -to achieve compliance with the noise standard for interior living area. (45 dBA maximum :noise level) and the General Plan standard for exterior yards (60 dBA). A forced air mechanical ventilation system shall be installed in conjunction with sound -rated windows as needed to maintain interior noise levels at -or below 45 dBA Ldn. The applicant shall provide an acoustical report prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer that demonstrates that the proposed building construction will meet both interior and exterior noise standards. Said report shall be submitted by the applicant for review and approval of the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit. Visual Quality_and. Aesthetics SPARC BP V -1 The project's outdoor lighting plan, including the proposed design, and location of lighting fixtures, shall be .subject to .approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. PD BP V -2 All exterior lighting shall be directed onto-the project site and access ways and shielded to prevent glare and intrusion onto adjacent properties. Only low - intensity light standards and /or wall- mounted lights shall be used (no flood lights): Lights attached to buildings shall provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall and shall generate no direct glare; Parking lot and security lighting shall be typical of lighting for multi - family uses. • PD Planning, Division FM 'Final Map SPARC Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee FM Fire Marshal BP Building Permit LTM Long -Term Monitoring ENG Engineering CO Certificate.of Occupancy BD Building Division DC During ; construction Page 5 ATTAC H M E fV T 9 1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 2 MEMORANDUM 3 4 Community Development Department, Planning Division,.11 English Street,.Taalum'a, CA `94952 5 (707) 778 -4301 Fax (707) 778 -4498 E- mail: cdd(a 6 7 DATE: November 25, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO. I 8 9 TO: Planning Commission 1 o . FROM: Lynn Goldberg, Contract Planner 11 SUBJECT: BOULEVARD APARTMENTS 12 REZONING TO PUD (03- ZOA- 0405 -CR) 13 945 PETALUMA BLVD. NORTH, APN 006- 450 =018 14 15 y 17 18 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council 9 to: 02 1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. 21 2. Rezone the project site to the Boulevard Apartment Planned Unit District. 22 3. Adopt the proposed Unit' Development Plan for Boulevard Apartments. 23 4. Adopt the proposed Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD. 24 26 27 Project: Name: Boulevard Apartments (Buckelew Programs) 28 Address:. 945 Petaluma Blvd. North 29 APN 006- 450 -018 30 Project File No. 03- ZOA- 0405-CR 31 Project Planner: Lynn' Goldberg, Contract Planner 32 Project Applicant:, Buckelew Programs 33 Property Owner: Petaluma Community Development Commission 34 Property Size: .85 acres 35 Site Characteristics: The project site is located at the north end of the downtown area, on the • 36 west side of Petaluma Boulevard North between Sycamore Lane /Shasta Avenue and Magnolia 37. Avenue, and approximately 2,200 'feet west of the Petaluma River (see Attachment A, Location Boulevard Apartments 03 ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 1 November 25, 2003 I Map). Surrounding uses include the Petaluma Police Station to the north, Town and -Country 2 Shopping Center and strip commercial to the east, a commercial building*' and single'family • 3 residences to the south, and single- and multi - family residences to the west. 4 The site .is relatively level and approximately two to three, feet higher in elevation than the 5 adjacent grade; The site is covered with weedy grasses, with a few shrubs and 'trees along 6 the property edges. 7 Surrounding uses include the Petaluma Police Station to the north, commercial to. the south and 8 east andmultifamily residential to the west. 9 Existing Use: Vacant 10 Proposed Uses: The applicant proposes to construct 15 one- bedroom apartments in three one - 11 and two - story, wood frame buildings. Proposed 'accessory uses include• a community. room_ , 12 office, laundry room, and 12 parking spaces. 13 Current Zoning: Highway Commercial (CH), 14 Proposed Zoning: PlannedUnit�'District (PUD) 1.5 Current General Plan Land Use Designation: Mixed Use (MX) 16. Proposed General.Plan Land Use Designation: No change 17 Subsequent Actions if Project is Approved: 18 0 City Council Review and Approval 19 . SP Review and Approval 20 • Grading and Building Permits 21 ^ sax N ' 23 24 The a pp licant proposes (o constru 15 one - bedroom apartments in three one- ,and two -story 25 wood frame buildings see Attachment B, Project Description). Fourteen very low- income 26 individuals, with a mental disability will, live • in the project, as well as an on -site manager: The 27 long -terra affordability of the rents will be ensured by the applicant. 28 A two - story building fronting on Petaluma Boulevard North will include a community room, 29 office, and laundry room on the first floor, and apartments on the second floor: A patio area on 30 the west side of this building will provide space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Two 31 other apartment buildings will be located in the property's interior. Each apartment will have a 32 private deck or patio., All units will be entered directly from the outside. The nine ground -floor 33 units will be wheelchair- accessible. 34 The project will be accessed by a single._ driveway from Petaluma Boulevard North. Twelve 35 uncovered parking spaces, two of which will be handicapped - accessible; will be distributed 36 throughout the site. An emergency vehicle turnaround will be provided on- site. Landscaping will 37 be planted around each of the buildings. Trees will be 'installed around the entire project 38 perimeter, including street trees on Petaluma Boulevard North. • Boulevard Apartments 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR . Page 2 November 25, 2003 1 REQUESTED • 2 The applicant has, applied to the City for a rezoning, of the subject property from the Highway 3 Commercial District to the Planned Unit. District, and the adoption of a Unit Development Plan 4 and Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit District (see 5 Attachment D). 6 Following Planning Commission action, the application will be reviewed by the City Council, 7 followed by final Site Plan :& Architectural. Review Committee review of the site, architectural, 8 and landscaping plans. 9 BACKGROUND 10 Prior Uses of Site 11 The property has been used in the past as a headstone carving yard, and a building once stood 12 near its center as early as 1877. 13 SPARC Preliminary Review 14 The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee conducted, a preliminary architectural and 15 site plan review of the proposal on June .26, 2003 (see Attachment E, SPARC Minutes). In 16 general, the Committee found the site plan to be well - designed, with good buffers from 17 neighboring properties. 18 ' In response to the Committee's comments, the following changes have been made to the 19 project's design: 20 The board and batten has been revised to horizontal siding on all of the elevations. Stucco 21 has been incorporated on the elevations of the other buildings to relate more to the street - 22 front building. 23 • The wood boards with the 'X' design has been removed from the skin of the buildings. The 24 'X' design has been incorporated into the stair and. guard-railings of `all three buildings, which 25 consists of perforated metal screen with recycled plastic lumber as the structure creating the 26 'X'. 27 Shading devices of recycled. plastic lumber have been added to the east, west, and south 28 facing windows on'the. two buildings in the west portion of the site, which will reduce solar 29 9 ain, and therefore, reduce glare and cooling needs during the summers. 30 Neighborhood Review 31 The applicant sponsored two neighborhood "'open houses" to share the project's plans with 32 residents in the vicinity and address any concerns. The first event was attended by approximately 33 20 to 30 area residents. Two -interested neighbors attended the open house; in October. 34 PROJECT ANALYSIS 35 General Plan Consistency 36 The project site's General Plan land use designation is 'Mixed Use," which is intended to allow ,37 residential uses along with commercial uses, including but not limited to retail commercial, 38 offices, and restaurants. This allows for flexibility in site design and unit type. Boulevard Apartments 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 3 November 25, 2003 1 The permitted number of housing ,units is dependent' upon topography,, environmental setting, 2' existing and nearby land uses, proximity to major, streets and transit, and distance to shopping • 3 and parks. Higher densities (10 -30 units /acre) are allowed where measurable communitybenefit 4 would-be derived; where infrastructure, services, and facilities are available; and where superior 5 design. is proposed to , ensure an attractive, healthyliving environment. 6 The proposed project would have a density of approximately IS units,per acre. The finding can r 7 be made that the community will benefit from the provision of affordable housing; for the 8 mentally - disabled; that adequate `infrastructure, services, and facilities are available (see! 9 discussion ;in followi g sections), and, that superior design is proposed and will be ensured 10 through the design review process. 11 Projects that are entirely residential are allowed in areas designated for Mixed Use subject to the 12 following findings: 13 1. The project will help the City achieve its housing policies relating to housing type; location, 14 mix or affordability. 16 2. Theproject.'is designed to be compatible with surrounding uses. 1.6 3.. The project: will. not have a detrimental impact: on existing infrastructure — especially traffic 17 and access to the street network. 18 4. The project will not have. a detrimental impact on the City's inventory` of commercially - Y Y Y bringing to 20 developable; omrnercal and a ltservicestualh benefit the community b brin in restdents .cl user 21 5. Superior design will ensure an attractive, comfortable; and healthy living environment. 22 Staff believes that the above findings can be made, because the project will help the City ael ieve 23 its goals of.providing affordable housing for special needs groups, it .will be compatible with 24 surrounding uses, it will have .a minimal impact on traffic and the street network, theproject site 25 is less than an acre., and would not represent a significant-: loss of commercial property; and the 26 City's design process will ensure a superior project design. 27 The project would help the City of Petaluma meet its share of regional housing need` for low- 28 income housing, and is supported by a number. ,o f Housing Element policies and programs, 29 including the following: 30 Policy 1.2 Encourage the development of housing on underutilized land. 31 Program 4.3 Continue to work with non-profit housing organizations to benefit from their 32 expertise in, and resources for developingand,supporting affordable housing. 33 Policy 6.4 Promote the provision of disabled- accessible units and housing for the mentally- 34 and.physically- disabled. 35 Program 613 Support the construction of housing specifically designed for the mentally ill. 36 Additionally, Policy 9.1 calls for the minimizing of impacts of affordable and special needs 37 housing,proj`ects on existing neighborhoods through the design_ review and approval process and 38 by working with project managers. Boulevard 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 4 November` 25,'2003 1 Zoning Ordinance Consistency 2 The applicant requests that the .subject property be rezoned from Highway Commercial to Planned 3 Unit District to allow for design flexibility. Development in this zone requires approval by the City 4 Council of a Unit Development Plan showing the design of the district, the interrelationship of 5 uses, and their relation to the surrounding uses and area, as well as specific development standards 6 for the district. 7 The applicant has submitted a Unit Development Plan consisting of a site plan that depicts 8 building, parking and open space locations (Exhibit A1.0)„ floor plans (Exhibits A 2.1, 2.2, 3. 1, 9 3.2, 4.1., and 4.2), roof plans (Exhibits 2.3, -3.3, and 43), architectural elevations for each building, 10 a landscape plan (Exhibit L -1), and,a'preliminary grading and drainage plan (Exhibit C -1). 11 . The applicant has also drafted Development Standards for the district that specify permitted 12 principal and accessory uses, maximum height; minimum lot area, width and depth; minimum 13 setbacks; and minimum open space (see Attachment D). 14 Permitted principal uses would be limited to multiple dwellings. Permitted accessory uses are 15 based on those found in the Zoning Ordinance's residential districts, and include signs, accessory 16 buildings such as garages and carports, exempt telecommunications facilities, mini telecom- 17 munications facilities, as well as anon -site manager's office, tenant services such as laundry and 18 mail facilities, and a recreational and meeting room for the use of tenants and their guests. 19 The proposed maximum building height of 35 feet is slightly higher than the 30 foot limit of the 20 Garden Apartment Residence District (RMG) in order to accommodate a design feature on • 21 Building 3. The proposed maximum building coverage of 40% is the same as that of the RMG 22 District. The proposed minimum side and rear, yards (10 and 15 feet, respectively) will provide 23 adequate setbacks from surrounding properties. The proposed zero front yard setback reflects the 24 direction of SPARC, which preferred ,to site the primary building as close as possible to the front 25 property line to be :consistent with the existing commercial development to the south along 26 Petaluma Boulevard. Building Three will actually be set back seven feet from the property line to 27 accommodate balconies and bays on the second floor, and the front steps and ramp. 28 As part of the Unit Development Plan,, 12 parking. spaces are proposed for the project. The 29 applicant has submitted , a justification for this parking ratio based on, the fact that at a 16 -unit 30 apartment complex similar to the, proposed project (Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments in 31 Novato) only six of the 16 residents, own cars (see Attachment F). The applicant expects that 32 tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a similar pattern regarding car ownership. Each 33 unit will have a single occupant; and only a few of the very low- income residents are likely to own 34 cars at initial occupancy. As time ,goes by; a few more residents may acquire cars since residents 35 will have more affordable rent. However, experience at Margaret Duncan Green Apartments 36 indicates that even after six' years,, less than'half of the residents will own cars. 37 Furthermore, the project site is well -served by public transportation and is close to shopping and 38 other services. Therefore, the 12 on -site parking spaces should adequately accommodate both 39 resident and visitor 40 Zoning Ordinance Section 19A- 300,requires that the Planning Commission/City Council make 41. the following findings to approve a Unit Development Plan. The suggested basis for making 42 each finding follows. Boulevard Apartments 03 -ZOA- 0405 =CR Page 5 November 25, 2003 I I. [The] PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or more 2 thoroughfares, and',that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any additional traffic 3 generated by the development. 4 The traffic impact study prepared for the proposed project concluded that the levels of service 5 (LOS) at. therthree. intersections studied would be unchanged at LOS 13 C, and A respectively, 6 if project traffic were 2to be added. All three intersections, therefore, would continue to operate 7 at acceptable service levels. 8 2. The plan for the .proposed development' presents, a unified and organized arrangement of 9 buildings and service facilities which are". appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby 10 properties and that adequate : landscaping and /or screening is, included if necessary to ;insure 11 compatibility. 12 SPARC was supportive of the proposed site plan. The project's preliminary ;landscaping plan 13 call's for trees to be planted along all of the property -lines that adjoin _existing uses, in 14 addition to the planting of vines on perimeter fences in order to provide screening for 15 neighboring properties. 16 3. The natural and;scenic qualities of the site are protected, with adequate.a:vadab.le and 1.7 private; spaces. designated on the Unit Development Plan. 18 The project site�lacks any significant natural or scenic: qualities. A patio area on:the west side 19 of this building will provide. space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Each apartment 20 will haye a private deck or patio. 21 4 The development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant, will not 22 be detrimental 'to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in r ! 23 keeping with the' general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, 24 with the Petaluma, General Plan, and with any applicable plans adopted by the City. 25 An Initial Study that evaluated potential environmental impacts associated with the project 26 deterin'ined that no significant environmental effects would result from this .proposal. The 27 project will help the City meet its, goals for providing affordable housing for special needs 28 groups. It is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance , of promoting orderly 29 community development and providing open space for ligt and air. 30 The following findings are also required to approve, anamendment to the Zoning Ordinance: 31 1. The proposed amendment is in general conformity with the Petaluma General Plan and any 32 applicable plans. 33 The project is consistent with the intent of the Mixed Use Land Use Designation and will 34 help'the City achieve ,its goals of providing affordable housing for special needs groups; 35 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare require or clearly permit.the adoption 36 : of the proposed.amendment. 37 The project . will be compatible with surrounding uses, it will have a negligible impact on 38 traffic and the street network, the project site is Tess than an acre and would, not, represent . 39 significant loss of commercial property, and the City's design process-will ensure a superior 40 project design. Boulevard Apartments 03 -Z,OA- 0405 -CR Page 6 November 25, 2003 a I Staff has prepared draft findings that may be used in recommending approval of the proposed • 2 zone change and planned unit district development standards to the City Council (see 3 Attachments J and K). 4 Department and.Advisory Committee. Recommendations 5 Along with recommended conditions from the Engineering Section, Public Facilities & Services 6 Department, and Fire Marshal, most of the Police, Department's requests (Attachment H) have 7 been ;incorporated into the -project's recommended conditions "of approval (Attachment L). The 8 request to install a decorative iron 'fence around the project perimeter and to maintain a 24 -hour on- 9 site manager have been. withdrawn by the Police Department. The comment regarding landscaping 10 will be reserved for the final SPARC review process.. 11 The, Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee has submitted recommended conditions of approval 12 for the project (Attachment 1). Staff recommends that the following conditions of approval be 13 applied to the project (Attachment; L): 14 Indoor, ground -floor, secure bicycle parking shall be provided. for each apartment. Secure 15 bicycle parking shall also be provided at Building 3 for visitors and staff. 16 There shall be no direct glare'into cyclist/pedestrianeyes, including from security lighting. 17 • Project residents shall be provided with information about bus routes and transit service. 18 Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of .Occupancy, the applicani shall provide a simply one - 19 page document to the city naming a designated "transportation coordinator" and describing 20 specific incentives for residents to walk, bicycle, or take transit. 21 The project shall. utilize Best Management practices regarding pesticide/herbicide use and fully 22 commit to Integrated Pest Management techniques 'for the protection of bicyclists and 23 pedestrians. If pesticides: or herbicides are used in areas by pedestrans/bicyclsts, warning signs 24 shall be posted. 25 The following Committee recommendations have not been :incorporated into the recommended 26 conditions of approval for the following.reasons; 27 Additional bicycle parking - The requirement for each resident to have a bicycle parking space 28 at Building 3 in addition to a space at or near their unit seems excessive because a large 29 number of ,cycling guests are unlikely to visit the project at any one time. However, some 30- bicycle,parking at Building 3 will be provided for visitors and staff. 31 Outdoor seating While some outdoor seating will be provided' on the patio area near Building 32 '3, the applicant does not feel that as many as 3,0 people would be using that area at any one 33 time.. 34 Fund contribution - The City did not adopt a Pedestrian and Bicycle Mitigation Fund as part of 35 the recent fee update. 36 Ramps - -The preject',s grading and drainage plan already provides for ramps from the sidewalk 37 and across the driveway. 38 Soil stabilizer The applicant's landscape consultant does not believe that stabilizer is 39 necessary, as the paths covered with decomposed granite will be lightly traveled, the product is Boulevard Apartments 03- ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 7 November 25, 2003 I expensive and the stabilizer will make the soil less permeable. Given that this a._design detail, 2 this issue could be revisited at the time of final S`PARC.review.� 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS 4 A notice of public hearing was published in the Argus.Courier, and notices were sent to residents 5 "and property owners within' 500 feet of the subject properties: Additional notices were,mailed to 6 residents of the White Oak neighborhood who had expressed' an interest in this project. As of the 7 writing of this report, 28 letters (Attachment M) have been received in support of the project. 8 ENVIRONMENTAL, REVIEW 9 Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act an Initial Study of 10 potential environmental impacts was. prepared (see Attachment. G). The potential for impacts in. 11, the areas of noise and geology./soils were identified. Mitigation measures have been proposed 12 and' agreed to by the applicant that will reduce potential impacts in these two' areas to' less than 13 significant (note, mitigation measures H -2 and 'H -'5 were included in error and have been stricken 14 from the draft Initial Study and from. the Mitigation. Monitoring Program). There is no: substantial 15 evidence that supports a fair argument that the, project, as. mitigated, would: have a significant 16 effect' on the environment. It, is therefore,. recommended that the Commission recommend 17 adoption of the `project s Mitigated. Negative Declaration and 'Mitigation Monitoring Report to 18 the City, Council. 19 20 ATTACHMENTS: 21 Attachment A: Location, Map .; 22 Attachment B: Project Description from Buckelew`Programs 23 Attachment C- Memo from Bonnie Gaebler, Housing Administrator 24 Attachment D: Draft Development Standards, Boulevard Apartments Planned Unit District 25 Attachment E: Minutes from SPARC Meeting)of June 26, 2003 26 Attachment F: Justification for Reduced Parking Requirements 27 Attachment, G: Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan 28 Attachment H: Memorandum from Cindie Fahy, Petaluma Police Department, dated 9/29/03 29 Attachment I: Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee recommendations, dated 9/24/03 30 Attachment J: Findings for Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration 31 Attachment K: :Findings for Rezoning to PUD- Planned Community District and Approval of 32 thePUD Development Standards 33 Attachment L: 'Draft Conditions of Approval 34 Attachment M: Correspondence Received 35 Attachment N: Plans (Commission members only): 36 Site plan: (Exhibit A 1.0) 37 Floor plans (Exhibits A 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 32, 4. 1, and 4:2) 38 Roof plans (Exhibits 2.3, 3.3, and 4:3) 39 Architectural. elevations 40 Landscape plan (Exhibit L -1) 41 Preliminary grading and drainage plan,(Exhibit C-1) Boulevard, Apartments 03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR Page 8 November 25, 2003 s Planning Commission Minutes - November 25, 2003 ATT^4 — _H LENT 10 Fy L U City of Petalu California �L1 ' City Council Chambers a, City Hall, 11 English Street 'Petaluma, CA 94952 Telephone 707/778 -4301 /Fax 7071778 -4498 &' Mail' 0annine(d?ci.petaIuma.cams Web Page hq:/Avww:ci.petaIuma;cq.us • • 1 2 Planning Commission Minutes EXCERPT, 3 November 25i 2003 7000 PM 4 5 Commissioners: Present.; Asselmeier, Barrett, Dargie Healy, ,McAllister, Rose, von 6 Raesfeld 7 8 * Chair 9 10 Staff. George White, Assistant Director, Community Development 11 Lynn Goldberg Project Planner 12 Anne Windsor; Administrative. Secretary 13 14 15 Public hearing began: @7:00 16 IT PUBLIC HEARING: 18 NEW BUSINESS': 19 20 I. BOULEVARD APARTMENTS, 945 Petaluma North 21 AP No.: 006 - 450 -018 22 File: 03 -ZOA -0405 23 Planneri' 'Lynn Goldberg 24 25 Applicant is .requesting, a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a Mitigated '26 Negative Declaration for the project to build " 15 one- bedroom apartments to house 14 27 low - income individuals with a mental illness, and one onsite manager. Rezone the project 28 site to the Boulevard Apartment Planned Unit District,' adopt the proposed Unit 29 Development Plan for Boulevard Apartments and adopt the Development 30 Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD. 31 Lynn Goldberg `presented the staff report. After the packet went out we received the 32 following correspondence: 33 a John and Liz Maxwell., 11820 Mill Street, Petaluma, in support of the project. 34 e Rosemary.McCreary, 6055 Lichau Road Penrigrove, in support of the project Planning Commission Minutes - November 25, 2003 1 Brian Rademacher, 216 White Oak Circle, Petaluma, in opposition to the project. 2 . Mary .and Jim Duensing; 121 White Oak Circle, Petaluma, in, opposition to the 3 project. 4 Katie Crecelius, Housing Consultant: Presented the project_ and introduced the project 5 team. 6 Christine Vargas, Kodama Diseno, Architect: Presented the project site plan. 7 Public comment opened: 8 Gary: Pierce, Housing Specialist, Sonoma, County Mental Health; Expressed support for 9 the project. Spoke highly of Buckelew Programs. Asked for.the Planning Conniission's 10 support. 11 Kenneth Schmidt, 3 =12 -1.2` Street: Happy that Petaluma is considering :offering. housing 12 to people with mental illness. Spoke highly of'Buckelew Projgrams. 13 Michele' McCabe, 1.08 Saratoga Court: I work for the Marin County Public, Guardian 14 `program acid want to offer a reference for Buckelew Programs. There are misconcepfions 15 about mental illness. People living in the Boulevard Apartments are not people with 16 acute mental illness. They will be good.:neighbors and supported by an.ezcellent'staff. 17 John Records: Spoke regarding people with. mental disabilities needing this type- of 18 housing. Performance and follow through is essential for type of project. 19 Jeff.Ray, Neighbors Establishing Social Priorities (NESP): The majority of residents in 20 the immediate area are I against the project. The applicant promised ;neighborhood O 2.1 meetings which never took place. Feel this location is inappropriate for. following 22 reasons: people with: major menial illness who need *medication, sometimes if 'they are. 23 feeling -well, they do not take medications; cost of City services will be increased to 24 $900/hr. Asked the Commission to deny the proposed application. 25 Toby Jones, 46 Acorn Circle, I believe this is a constructive way to provide housing: and 26 help for the mental ill. 27 Lynn Berard; 436 Gossage. Commended the City for their support of affordable:housing. 28 1 sit on the board of a Buckelew project in Marin County: The Buckelew residents have 29 been good residents and Buckelew has an. excellent reputation, properties integrate 30 well into the community. This is an excellent location for this type of project. Requested 31 the Planning Commission's support. 32 Roy Bateman, 'Marin County Community Development Agency:, Talked of his 33 experience working with Buckelew Programs. Have funded Buckelew programs in 34 Novato and San Rafael. Do not know, of any problems caused by the residents. Would 35 have no reservation , of having. a Buckelew project as 'a neighbor. 36 Paula Cook, Community Housing Development Corp. of Santa Rosa: This is an 37 underservedi population and this is an excellent project and we urge you to. approve the 38 project. 39 Len Smith, 1400 Caulfield: Spoke in favor of the project: I am a board member of 40 Petaluma Ecumenical Projects. PEP will manage the apartments and we want to 41 encourage the Commission to vote in; favor of this project. 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2003 1' Val Gavozdea, 217 White Oak' Circle: Opposed to the project. Mental illness is a broad 2 definition and' unfortunately *the project : talks very little .about the people who will be 3 residents. The ,environment will be crowed and noisy — they need an environment of 4 open space Putting people in small, cramped spaces is counter productive. The location 5 is unacceptable for this type of project. 6 Julie Morgan, - 308 -.10` Street: I am a close family member of someone with a mental 7 illness. We need to extend.'our welcome�'and help these people. I have been afraid and 8 hope that the neighbors will open their arms to these people. 9 James Mobley, 143 Acorn Drive: Believe this is an excellent project and am happy that 10 Petaluma is providing these 'services, All citizens deserve a chance to live a productive 11 life. 12 Majida Gibson: PEP; Sonoma County Housing Coalition: Am in ,support of this project 13 — it is superior project and thi's is an excellent location for this project. Buckelew is an 14 excellent group. 15 John Morgan, 308 -10`h Street: Work for Burbank Housing and echo what has been said 16 about Buckelew Programs. We have had no problems with Buckelew programs. Mental 17 illness has come 'info; vmy immediate family — there is a terrible stigma attached. 18 Neighbors are afraid that the ,residents propose a danger. I live near a Board and Care 19 residence and it, is transparent, There is a misperception about people with mental illness. 20 Public comment closed. • 21 Jay Zlonick, Executive+ Director of Buckelew The term major mental 'illness does not . 22 equal dangerous. We deal w.'ith residents who can be treated. We .do not consider this a 23 crowed site. There is a very, successful project .in San Francisco which is much more 24 dense that this project. We are not insensitive to the concerns of the neighbors. They are 25' the same concerns, :expressed by residents of Fairfax and San Rafael. We have letters in 26 support of the project: from people who previously opposed projects. 27 Commissioner Asselmeier.: Asked' about the screening process. 28 Jay Zlonick: County mental;health does the screening and recommends people and then 29 Buckelew does a screening. We'review history and interview clients and look at the past 30 behavior. Funding is on a county basis, will do what we can to give preference to 31 Petaluma residents. 32 Commissioner Asselmeier: Asked about the resident managers. 33 Jay Zlonick: The: manager helps with property management, rent collection; the 34 on -site manager is not there to manage the mental health of clients. If someone 'needed 35 ongoing care they 'would not be:.here. 36 Commissioner Asselmei'er: Asked if residents hold jobs. 37 Jay Zlonick: Yes, some are employed part time and some full time. Other residents do 38 some volunteer work. 39 Break @ 8:10 ® 40 Resumed @ 8:15 Planning Commission Minutes - November 25, 2003 1 Commission Discussio_ n: F 2 Council Member Healy:. I am sensitive to neighborhood issues. The use proposed meets 3 ,a tremendous need. We are lucky that this is a Buckelew Program,— referred to the,letteIr 4 from Fairfax residents in support.:of the. project. This project ,will' be. here for 40 years. 5 Everything needs to be put in writing to ensure. what is promised will be 6 .carried out, particularly the two-step screening process, the on- site.,manager, and on -going services to 7 residents. 'These are not conditions for-the project. Needs to be something to specify that 8 this will be .a, well- managed facility. Ask Buckelew or staff to provide guidance with 9 how this will happen. Question about on -site parking. Site is constrained 'because there 10 is no street parking. Possibly other commissioners can discuss. 11 Commissioner Dargie: Agree with Council Member Healy regarding putting, in writing 12 about screening and an on -.site manager. 13 Commissioner McAllister: Agree that agreements in writing would be- a good idea. 14 Support-'the, project and think it is a need for the community. Believe the location is 15 good. 16 Commissioner von Raesfeld: The issue is asocial perception issue. I. am in support of 17 the project. Specific comments: condition from the Planning Division regarding a use 18 permit.. tsi George White: Proposal is for PUD` zoning designation which controls all uses and 20 structures on the property. 21 Commissioner VonRaesfeld: There-needs to be areferencel funding sources. 22 Commissioner ,Asselmeier: Share the comments' about 'use restrictions and funding. 23 Would .like Petaluma. residents to receive priority. What aspect of rent control is 24 provided? Need to continue to :uphold P&aluma's reputation to provide this type 25 of housing: The.'teputation of Buckielew is commendable. Petaluma'.should be proud of 26 this type of project. Additional statement of what amenities would be for the residents. 27 In development standards, Attachment D 9 — do, not understand the reference to pg:. 28 minor .telecommunication facilities. 29. G eorge ' White: It is, standard. ,language — it can stay in the agreement or come ' out. 'By 30 omission it would be prohibited. 31 Lynn. Goldberg: Buckelew is trying to model existing residential district development 32 standards. Would be a permitted use. , 33 Commissioner Rose: Do not have a great deal to add': Believe: it a fundamentally sound 34 proposal. The .applicant has documented. their ' ntentions. Need to have language 35. regarding the use. Comments by the Police Departent were; not mentioned in the staff 36 report- how is this addressed. 37 Katie Crecelius: Buckelew did not feel the conditions were appropriate. We feel a 6-foot 38 fence is sufficient. We. met with the Police Chief and addressed his issues'. Would be 39 very difficult to have all the units' patios facing inward. 4o Lynn Goldberg- Police were more concerned for the security of the apartment residents. 41 The Police Chief was Will to let the; conditions go. Planning Commission Minutes - November 25, 2003 :1 Commissioner von Raesfeld: Asked whether access to the project from Hawthorne Court • 2, was possible. 3 George White: Hawthorne is a private street and will not be extended into the project .4 site. 5 Alice Thomas: In a similar residence, only 5 residents have cars. Believe this would 6 hold true for this project. 'Less than 50% of the residents. have cars. 7 Chair Barrett: Concur with the other commissioners. I am happy with the changes to the 8 project after the SPARC,preliminary review. Want to reassure the neighbors, working 9 with PEP projects and Buckelew they will be in good hands. 10 Additional conditions of approval /issues identified: 11 Provide the, following to City 12 • Provide ::a draft of a written understanding between Buckelew and the City 13 as to the operational characteristics of the facility including: 14 - Specification of Buckelew role for screening and follow -up 15 before going to City Council. 16 - Use and rent restrictions and HUD funding. 17 Preference given to Petaluma residents 18 Direction to SPARC: 19 o Focus on amenities for the resident, including outdoor seating and 20 socialization opportunities. 21 e Develop the landscape plan further through the SPARC process. 22 Commissioner von Raesfled: What is the multi -use room on the first floor. 23 Katie Crecelius: Is for the residents. 24 Commissioner von Raesfeld: Maybe you can expand the use of the multi- purpose room 25 for community purposes. 26 Chair Barrett: Is limited by parking. 27 George White: Will discuss with the applicant and write into the PUD guidelines. 28 CommissionerAsselmeier: It maybe restricted by the funding. 29 M/S Healy /Dargie� to' forward a recommendation to adopt a Mitigated Negative 30 Declaration, rezone the project site to the Boulevard Apartment Planned Unit District, 31 adopt the proposed Unit: Development Plan for Boulevard Apartments and adopt the 32 proposed Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD. 7 -0 33 34 35. Adjournment: 9 :00 36 37 38 SAK- Planning Commission \Minutes \PCMinutes03 \112503.doc 5 ATTACHMENT 1 1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM Police Department, 969 Petaluma Boulevard Nortli, Petaluma, CA 94952 (707) 778 -4372 Fax (707) 778 -4476 E- mail. police@cipetaluma.ca.us DATE: 9 -29 -03 TO: Lynn A. Goldberg Project Planner FROM: Cindie Fahy, •CSO SUBJECT: Boulevard Apts., ,03 -ZOA- 0405 -CR The Petaluma Police Department request the following in regards to Boulevard Apt Complex. Parking. If this complex is Private Property., it;needs to be posted for parking enforcement. When it is properly posted, the management can enforce the rules. Buildings. We request all patios face the inside of'the complex. Addressing. If each building is lettered or numbered, the buildings should have large letters, and numbers. Contrasting colors are recommended. If only the Apartments are lettered or numbered., same as. above. The addresses shall be on the front area, near the door for visibility. Each apartment door shall have a "peep hole" installed. This will allow each occupant to view outside their. door. The community room, laundry room and office need to be listed on the outside of each building. On Site Manager. A 24 hour on.site manager is requested. This manager shall maintain current emergency numbers for all tenants. Fencing. Install a decorative iron fence along the property line. Landscaping. All trees shall be kept trimmed,up. to five (5) feet and all shrubs kept trimmed down to 18 inches. Landscaping shall not be placed, or planted in front of windows or entrances to any buildings,. i C September 24, 2003. Subject: PBAC Recommendations on Boulevard Apartments Planner: Lynn Goldberg ATTACHMENT 12 *Bicycle parking* 1. Applicant shall provide indoor, ground- floor, secure bike parking for each apartment. Building 3 shall have sufficient bike parking for each resident to park a bike there as well. *Glare -Free Lightinq* 2. There shall be no direct glare into cyclist/pedestrian eyes. This includes security lighting. 3. Applicant to add lighting and identify Lighting locations on plans. *Benches and Drinking ,Fountains* 4. Applicant shall provide outdoor seating in courtyard and patio spaces to accommodate twice the number of bike parking spaces. (e.g. 15 bike parking spaces would require 30 seats.) The seating may include benches, seating walls, picnic tables. Areas with ample shade should be considered. 5. Applicant shall show these improvements on the site plan. *Class I Bikeways* 6. Applicant will have "soil stabilizer"' mixed in with the decomposed granite per engineer's specifications.. *Class II, III Bikeways* 7. Applicant shall make a,fair -share contribution toward the Pedestrian and Bicycle Mitigation Fund. (The city will hold and manage the funds until the fund is established.) *Pedestrian friendly infrastructure* 8. Applicant to 'provide curb- cut'Where sidewalk. meets driveway by Unit 6. Provide accommodation for wheelchair travel from sidewalk (from Petaluma Blvd.) across driveway'toward Unit 6 sidewalk? *Incentives to.walk, cycle to work* 9. Applicant shall provide information about bus routes (e.g..nearby bus shelter) and transit service to residents. 10. Prior to issuance of Certificate, of Occupancy, Applicant'shall provide a simple one - page document. to the city naming a designated "transportation coordinator' -- here, the Manager -- describing specific incentives for residents to walk, bicycle or take transit, 'thereby encouraging alternatives to driving cars to this site. (E.g. lending bicycles:for shorn errands.) *Pesticide./ herbicide use* 11. Under'no.circumstances shall', any pesticide /herbicide be applied in areas used. by pedestrians /bicyclists anywhere in this project. orthe 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 corn mit to Integrated Pest Management techniques for the protection of "bicyclists and pedestrians. *Compliance with other adopted City Plans / documents* 112. Applicant shall comply with all city plans. L SPARC Minutes ATTi4C H M E N T 13 *0 � ', City of Petaluma, CA 6 Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee 7 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 • 17 18 1.9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 • 39 40 2 Regular Meeting City Council Chambers City Hall, 11 English Street Telephone: 707 - 778 - 430`1 FAX: 707- 77.8 -4498 Minutes, EXCERPT June 26, 2003 June 26, 2003 3:00 p.m. Petaluma, CA E -Mail: cdd @ci.petaluma.ca.us Web Page: http: / /www.cl.petaluma.ca.us The Site Plan, and Architectural. Review Committee encourages applicants or their representatives to be available -at the meeting to answer questions so that no agenda item need be deferred to a later date' due to a lack of pertinent information. Roll Call: Present: Teresa Barrett, Janet Gracyk; T,erryKosewic, Chris' Lynch (absent), Jack Rittenhouse* *Chairperson Staff: Irene Borba Senior Planner Kim Gordon, Assistant Planner Anne Windsor, Administrative Secretary PRELIMINARY. REVIEW: III. BOULEVARD APARTMENTS, 945 Petaluma Blvd. North AP No: 006- 450 -018 File: 03- PRE -9256 Applicant is requesting Site Plan and Architectural preliminary ,review of a project for three, one and two -story buildings.. The two -story building fronting on the boulevard includes a community room, office, and, laundry room on the first floor with apartments on the second floor. The fifteen units will provide housing for 14 individuals with a mental illness as well as one unit for an on -site manager. SPARC Minutes June `26, 2003 1 Lara Spangler, Architect: Presented the architecture. 2 3 Alice Thomas: Program Director: Answered questions regarding tenants and caregivers.. 4 5 Discussion regarding the .reduction in units and - the lose of the mixed -use component. 6 Project needed to be scaled back due to funding issues. 7 8 Chair Rittenhouse: Sorry to see mixed. use taken out. Nice site plan, good buffer to 9 neighbors, provides green space for the.residents:, Concerned about look ofthe X braces: 10 Sun shades are a good idea on south elevation — would like to seethe detail. Like the 11 massing and asymmetry of the boulevard building. Problems with staircase blocking 12 windows on particular units. 13 14 Committee Member Barrett: Appreciate the buffer from the neighbors, like the site-plan. 15 16 Committee Member Gracyk: Like the site plan — particularly east and south, elevations. 17 Appreciate "the thoughtfulness regarding the awnings. Hesitation about the X's on the 18 building. Maybe keep for the back buildings — don't take the chance on the boulevard 19 elevation. 20 21 Chair Rittenhouse: Maybe push the front (boulevard) elevation. to .look more like the rear 22 units. 23 24 Committee Member 'Kosewic: The X° on the west elevation fit because it's on the first 25 floor; Front building .lost its simplicity — lack" of consistency. Site plan is good — exterior 26 finishes need work. 27 28 Chair Barrett: Like the detail on the corner of the front building — may look good on the 29 other buildings. Asked about signage on front building. 30 31 ,_Katie Crecelius: Would have signage out front on the office. 32 33 34 35 36 Adjournment: 6:35 37 3 , 8 39 2 1 01. • ATTACHN9'!ENT 14 James P. Oliver 1863 Adobe Creek Dr.. Petaluma, CA 94 USA email joliver @tropicalforestproducts.com September 25, 2003 Mayor David and Members of the City Council: City Hall 1.1 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor Glass, and City Council: �' cr [� OCT o 1 zoa iv,''. , UR 1 am a resident of Petaluma, and a registered voter. The Buckelew Programs has identified the opportunity to develop the' Boulevard Apartments at 945 Petaluma Blvd., for the purpose of assisting people with mental illness. The: Apartments will'be an attractive compound of 15 one= bedroom units. 1 support this effort, and I ask you to do so also. Buckelew Programs was invited into` Sonoma County to deliver services in 1999, . and operates the Sonoma County Independent Living (SOIL) program for over 100. independent= l,ivingAdults. Much has been written and discussed about the deplorable;stat_e of care available for people with a mental illness. Your support of this project is an opportunity to respond positively to those concerns. Most of'us worry that such a facility'would constitute a danger or annoyance.to our daily living. To answer and minimize this reflexive emotional response, Buckelew assures,that the individuals who will live at 945 Petaluma'Blvd. are members of theSCIL program, and are pre- screened (twice) when they are accepted into the program. The tenants have experience, living independently in the community, and have a track record of being responsible tenants and neighbors. Furthermore, t'o.the extent that facilities are not developed and available for these unfortunates, we may see many of them on our street corners. People do not choose to haven mental illness any more than people choose to have any disease. Due to the nature of their illnesses, these are,some�,of'the most vulnerable people in' our society. We can help them — and we are fortunate that Buckelew will do the organizing and the bulk of the work. Please support this project. Si r a r r� /FO COUNTY Of SONOMA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES September 15, 2003 Mayor David Glass Vice Mayor'Mike O'.Brien Council Members Keith Canevero, and Pamela Torliatt Petaluma City Hall 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 L Mark A. Kostielney - Director Afental Health Division R 6 �oO Ca th X41-- gizectat SE-P 1 r CEIVED MA YOR r SEP 17 2003 Mike Harris, Mike Healy, Bryant Moynihan Dear Mayor Glass, Vice Mayor'O'Brien and Council Members, lamm I am writing to express my support for the Buckelew Programs' Boulevard Apartments project planned for 945 North Petaluma Boulevard, which is to provide affordable permanent apartments for adults with mental illness. As the Mental Health Services Director of4he Sonoma County Mental Health Division, I am very pleased that Buckelew Programs accepted our invitation to provide supportive housing services to our clients in 1.999.. Buckelew brought years of experience and expertise iri working with people who have a mental illness, and its staff has proven to be caring, professional and responsible. We can count on thoroughness, follow - through and a.good working' relationship with clients, the County and the community. Buckelew Programs has been awarded a Federal grant to create affordable housing for Sonoma County adults — including those from Petaluma - who are able to live independently in the community,. Tenants. of this project will be clients of our Division, and will have.been screened by both our:,staffand Buckelew's staff. As. you can imagine, we are very excited about the prospect of additional housing for -1:4 deserving clients. I trust the City Government will support this affordable housing' project that our recovering clients so desperately need. It will surely be a' fine asset to the City of Petaluma. Sincerely, Cathy Geary,., LCSW ® Mental Health Services Director 3322 ,Chahate R 'oad, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 -1708 e p y I l ; phone (707) 565 -4850 ® fix (7(?7) 5h5 -4' 492. 0 Petaluma People Services Center 150 A PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 94952 (7 ()7j 765 -S4M FAX: (707) 765 -8452 AUG 21 2003 • August 19, 2003 Mayor David Glass, and City Council Petaluma City Hall I 1 English Street Petaluma CA 94952 Dear David and Council Members, 1.1;'1'Y As Executive Director of Petaluma People Services Center, I,am writing to express my support for the proposed Boulevard Apartments project that Buckelew Programs hopes to develop at 945 Petaluma Boulevard. I recently learned about this project, and I look forward to its approval by the Council. Petaluma has a history of supporting affordable housing projects, and this one in particular will fill an important need. We are fortunate that an agency such as Buckelew Programs has committed itself to helping deserving residents of our'City who, through no fault of their own, must cope with a long -term illness. Affordable housing goes a long way towards assisting people with a mental illness, and as a community, we should do all we can to assure that the Boulevard Apartments will be a success. With the County struggling to maintain mental health services in Petaluma and PPSC similarly challenged by funding cuts to its outpatient counseling program, the timing of.Buckelew's entry into our community couldn't,be better. Best Regards, Ron Kirtley Executive Director 1 ; u0G1✓1� G= Y;�i Se�ua� Seukce¢. � ;aa�raticacaact `� �outli &; (�acuc�e Ufa ke to eaa_. �ieue�tScc.x ® 7 & ;. .. zausccr�. _ 4U M TEUwOVn„ENCY .. ". ,, . _ . Advanced Communications Agilent Dr: Robert F:,Agrella', President, Santa Rosa -Junior.College Amy's Kitchen Becoming Independent T andon,,lnternational Association pt Machinists and Aerospace Workers Marijke Syck- Hoenselaare., Paradise Ridge Wnery CityVision Concerned Citizens for Santa Rosa Dan Condron Mitch, Conner, County Vision Committee on the Shelterless Council,on Aging Services For Seniors Terry-Davis, President - Summit State Bank Carole Ellis Faith Based Coalitiorrof Sonoma County Mari Featherstone, Santa Rosa Chamber of'Commerce Bob Flores, Faculty Advisor, Associated Students of SRJC Magda C. Gibson, Affordable Housing Consultant Goodwill Industries of the Redwood Empire Greenbelt Alliance Dr. Curtis L. Groninga, Vice President,. Santa Rosa Junior College Nancy Hall, CRI Michael J. Hayes, HUD Home Builders Association Jerry Johnson, Sonoma County Office of Education Bob Kingsley, North American Mortgage Company ,Helga Lemke, Sonoma County People for Economic Opportunity John Lowry, Executive'Director, Burbank Housing Kay Marquet, Sonoma County Community Foundation Craig S. Meltzner National Bank.,of the Redwoods John Norr Sonoma ,County Task Force on the Homeless North Bay Association of Realtors North Bay Housing Coalition North Coast Builders Exchange, NorthbayFamily Homes Northbay Technology Roundtable John R. O'Brien 'lichael J. Parman, The Press Democrat David Corse 4 *t;.Joseph ta Rosa Teachers Association SEW Local 707 Health Care System- Greater Sonoma County Suburban Alternatives Land Trust Deborah C. Swanson Sonia E. Tavlor Jay Zlotnick, Executive Director 9.14 Mission Avenue San Rafael, California, 94901 Dear'Mr. Zlotnick: Julv 11th , 2003 The Sonoma County Housing Coalition Consensus-Council is pleased to report we have reviewed your proposed 15 - unit :apartment complex at 945 Boulevard North in Petaluma SC and agree unanimously (one abstention) to support your ,project. We applaud you for your efforts in providing permanent supportive housing to enable the tenants to live a stable, independent life in our community. The site at 945 Petaluma Bled is ideally situated' for this type of project as it is near transportation and shopping. We support this needed and valuable housing for very low- income people living with disabilities and are confident the`Boulevard Apartments will be an outstanding example of a quality HUD 811 project. We ask, if this project changes in any significant. way, that�'you to submit the changes to us immediately. if at any time the project is amended.. and no longer falls within our criteria for approval, we reserve the right to rescind our support. We look forward..to seeing its completion: The coalition offers you the support of advocacy at your upcoming public. hearings. Please contact Margo Warnecke Merck 707 - 433 -5533 with your approval process schedule. Sincerely, So Housing Coalition Consensus Council / cc. Petaluma City Council l hell e Gervais C�J Leddy V,—) %�7_ Nick Stewart Clark- Blasdell il 06 -18 -03 To Mayor Glass and the City Council, R E 1':4A R • JUN 19 2003 I have lived in Petaluma for approximately 2 years and I am ,a registered voter. I am writing to express my support for the proposed Boulevard Apartments project that Buckelew Programs hopes to develop at 945 Petaluma Blvd. I am a Police Officer and during the course of my employment, I have seen first hand how programs such 'as Buckelew's provide safe and affordable housing for people with mental illnesses. Petaluma has a history of supporting affordable housing projects and this one will fill` an. important need. The overall community is fortunate that an agency such as Buckelew 'Programs has committed itself to helping residents of our community who, through no fault of their own, must cope with long -term illness. Affordable housing goes a long way towards assisting people with mental illness, and as a community, we should, make every effort to assure that the Boulevard Apartments will be a success. Respectfully, Christopher Jacob J'Jw 2 0 2003 C r. Pat Eklund 36 White Oak Way Novato, CA 94949 -7227 May 23, 2003 Mayor David Glass, and Council Members City of Petaluma City Hall 11 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor Glass and Councilmembers: I am writing to let you know of my positive experience with an affordable housing development built by. Buckelew, Programs in a residential neighborhood near downtown Novato. I was on the City Council when the project was proposed and approved. In 1997 Buckelew completed construction on a 1.6 -unit apartmentbui'lding at 1100 Olive Avenue in Novato, and 16 very low- income residents with a mental illness moved in. The • complex was named Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments, in honor of a long -time advocate for persons with mental ,illness. Residents receive supportive services from Buckelew's Marin Assisted'Independent Living (MAIL) Program. I understand your Council will, soon consider an application for a:zone change, as well as other planning approvals for a similar Buckelew development, on Petaluma Boulevard, to be called Boulevard Apartments. You should know that, to my knowledge, we have not received any complaints Thorn neighbors since Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments was occupied. The Buckelew complex is an attractive, important and successful component 11 of the.Novato's affordable housing stock. I am happy Buckelew came to town to build this great project! This letter represents My. vi alone and not the Novato City Council or any ether individual Council Member. I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any questions, please ;call rrre at home at (415) 883 - 9116. Sincerely,, J Pat Ek d Mayor Pro Tern City of Novato s • I JUN p g 2003 16 May 29, 2003 • Shirley White 1070 Santa Clara Lane Petaluma, Ca. 9495:4 Mayor David Glass and Members of the City Council, WR ECEE JUN 0 2 2003 tViAYOR I am writing in regard to the zone change so Buckelew and HUD can follow through with their plans to build one bedr.o.on apartments for the mentally.i,ll. The location chosen looks to me in to be in a favorable spot. As a member of Nami :and an Evacuate -for'my Son who is mentally ill. I find it necessary to speak out. We as citizens of Petaluma need to;dare for our own. My Son didn't choose to be ill. Like many of the mentally ill citi "zens here.. We need housing, and understanding of their conditions. Education.of the Mentally ill will teach us not to fear all. We can and already do co -exist with them. We now need'-to better provide for them. Independence is a key to a healthier l.ife;.for our recovering citizens. We can't close the door on them,. They won't go away. Their already here so w ats the fear or the problem. r • 1 0 0 Mayor David. Glass, and Member of the City City Hall 11 English 'Street Petaluma, CA 94952 - Q V RECEIVED MAY 3 0 200 3 MAY 2 9 2003 MAYOR I am a registered voter in Petaluma where I've lived since September 2000. 1: would like to express my support for the -Buckelew Programs project to develop the Boulevard Apartments on Petaluma Blvd. I learned about this project from a colleague who has a son receiving services from Buckelew's Sonoma County program. The program has enabled recipients to live more independently and enjoy a better quality of life. I look forward to approval, of this project by the Council. It is our good fortune that an agency as effective as Buckelew Programs is committed to helping residents with long- term illness lead a safe, and healthy life. The affordable housing project will benefit a needy population, of our community,and their families, sand we should make sure that the Boulevard Apartments- project is successful. Sincerely, Patt Herfindal 827 B Street Petaluma, CA 94952 C4 C,-�- Editor, , P etaluma Argus Courier. Petaluma, CA. Editor: May 18, 2003 We write in support of the proposal from Buckelew Programs tordevelop affordable housing at 945 Petaluma Blvd. Buckelew has along and stellar track record of providing,independent living arrangements in Marin county. In addition to decades of professional management expertise, Buckelew has obtained' the necessary funding to construct this housing on city- ,owned land. Through the responsible oversight, provided by Buckelew, people who ,have a mental illness and have demonstrated that they are capable of living independently in this community, will be provided that opportunity. Many of'these;.people already reside locally and will benefit from the more- affordable nature of these apartments. We urge the City Council to approve the Buckelew project and demonstrate, once again that one of the strengths of Petalumajs_ this community's willingness to embrace abroad array of residents, including those with, special needs. Andrew and Carol Eber 209 Kent St. Petaluma 763 -5741 y Mayor David Glass, and Members of the City Council Petaluma City Hall 11 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor- Glass and City Council Members: May 17, 2003 We have lived in'Petaluma for 3 years and we are registered voters. We are writing to support the proposed Boulevard°Apartments project that Buckelew Programs hopes to develop at 945 Petaluma Blvd. Josh has a brother who receives services from Buckelew's.Marin County program. With the help of Buckelew, he has safe, secure, and lifelong housing, has taken part time jobs, and has the benefits of mental health professionals to help him find and use community resources for a system of support, that allows him to live independently. He lives in a home for 6 adults with, mental" disabilities.. There is very little turnover, and the residents live quietly and take good care of the property. It is very important for the Departrnent of Mental Health to provide funding for agencies like Buckelew to.help residents of our County with disabilities: It's a tragedy that some people, out of ignorance, would be afraid of a person who has sought and accepted help for mental disabilities. The truly scary situation is if someone who needs the help has no access to it, and is forced to try to live like an animal on the streets. Please support this project. Buckelew is doing a remarkably good job, and their presence in Petaluma will be a great benefit to our community. Sincerely yours, Josh and Jody Reed 1312 St. Francis Drive Petaluma, Ca. 94954 • )7 Y_,� • Mayor David Glass Members of the Petaluma City Council ll English St. Petaluma Mayor and Councilmembers May 15, 2003 I have worked in Marin County since 1976 and have closely observed the professional way in which Buckelew Programs have managed their services, and the sensitive way in which they have interacted with each of the neighborhoods where they have operated facilities. Let me point out that Marin County is hyper - critical of even the appearance of an infringement on property rights Eby any source, but particularly a potentially controversial operation like Buckelew.. The fact that there have been no criticisms of Buckelew in Marin should give you a solid indication, that the proposed Boulevard Apartments which Buckelew plans to develop at 945 Petaluma Blvd, North, will provide affordable housing for those suffering mental illness, under the highly experienced supervision of the Buckelew staff. Buckelew is proposing to bring;a seasoned team to provide these needed mental health services to our community. They are financing this service with a, mix of Federat'funds so that the city will not be obligated to support this program We are fortunate that an agency with the • credibility and expertise of Buckelew is stepping forward to administer this program, and we call on you to add your official support to make this program a reality. Thank you. Sincerely, Andrew Eber Carol Eber. 0 r RECEIVED MAY 19 2003 Mayor David, Glass, and Members of the City Council Petaluma City Hall l.l' .English St. Petaluma, CA. 94952 Dear Mayor Glass. and City Council. Members: MAYOR May 10, 2003 I have lived in Petaluma for 15 years and I am a registered voter. I am writing to express my support for the proposed Boulevard Apartments project that Buckelew Programs hopes to develop at'945 Petaluma Blvd. I have a brother who receives services from Buckelew's Mann County program. With the help of Buckelew,. my brother 'has safe, secure, and lifelong housing, has taken part time jobs, and has the benefits of mental health professionals to help him find and use community resources fora system of support that allows him to live :independently. He lives in a home for 6 adults I with mental disabilities: There is very little turnover, and the residents live quietly and take good care of the property. It is very important for the Department of Mental Health; to provide funding for agencies like Buckelew to help residents of our County with disabilities. Ii's a tragedy that some people, out of ignorance, would be afraid of a person who has sought and accepted help is for mental disabilities. The truly scary situation is if someone who needs the help has no access to it, and is forced to try to live like an animal on the streets. Please support this project, Buckelew is, doing a remarkably good job, and their presence in Petaluma will be a great, benefit to lour community. Sincerely yours, J A Christopher J. Reed 1137 River Pine Circle ' Petaluma, Ca. .94954 0 1 . May 8, 2003 Mayor David_ Glass, and Members of City Council'. City Hall 11 English Street Petaluma, CA`94952 Dear Mayor and Members of City.Council: We understand that Buckelew Programs would like to build an affordable housing project in Petaluma that is similar, in. purpose, to the one they built in Fairfax. We would like to take this opportunity to tell you 'of our experiences and dealings with Buckelew Programs. We first met Mr. Jay. Zlotnick in 1984 when �he came to our home. He was canvassing our neighborhood. He introduced himself and showed us the plans and_ the architect's rendition of the proposed development of the vacant lot directly behind our property. There were two two -story structures, each with six bedrooms, common living room and kitchen. ® We were vigorously opposed to this proposal and led a petition drive to present the objections and concerns of the neighborhood to the Fairfax Town Council. We attended all Planning Commission and Council rneetings.that dealt with this issue. Ultimately, our bid to ,prevent Buckelew Programs from developing the property was denied by the Town Council. We then focused our efforts to ensure that our concerns were address by the Council and Planning Commission_ . We were concerned about the occupants, twelve persons living in the two buildings with only three /fours hours of supervision and counseling per day. We were also concerned about the intrusion'of privacy, since all of the homes .in the neighbor,hoo:d, except one, were single story homes. We felt that the proposed two -story structures would overlook our -yards and homes. These and other issues were addressed':by the Council and Planning Commission before final approval was granted. We must say that Buckelew Programs and Mr. Zlotnick in particular were verycooperative and accommodating throughout the process. They offered visits of their facilities, and discussions with some of their staff to allay our fears .about the future occupants. Wey re p leased to learn that they had a comprehensive and thorough screening procedure in place for their prospective clients. They made changes in the placement of Windows, provided fencing and landscaping to address our concerns regarding privacy. Buckelew Programs' facility in Fairfax was completed. in April, 1.986. Since that time, ten to twelve people have occupied the houses We are pleased to state • that we have not had any problems with the occupants, except for an occasional loud music during the daytime. The property and surrounding grounds are well maintained. Any problems such as fallen trees, etc. are handled promptly by Mr. Zlotnick. In closing, we can, reservation, that; our experience with Buckelew Programs has been positive. We have not experienced any of the problems we anticipated at the - outset. They are sensitive to the concerns of the neighborhood. Mr. Zlotnick is very accommodating, responsive, and willing to address any issues that may arise. Sincerely, Alberto B., Da. Cunha Kathleen J. Da Cunha 26 Westb.rae Drive • Fairfax,, CA 94930 -1423 Copy to: Jay Zlotnick, A.C.;SW. Executive Director Buckelew Programs ®. 4 4. � �> a off Tenth Street r RECEIVED Petaluma, California 949' MAY 0 51003 MAYOR May 3, 2003 I 5 Mayor David Glass, and Members of the City Council City Hall 1 I English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 I am writing in support of'the� proposed housing by Buckelew Foundation for Petalumans with mental illnesses. Someone close in Petaluma whom I love dearly is the reason .I am writing. Ten years ago or so when this young man was about :17 years old and apparently on a life path toward ivy league college and "success", he was stricken without warning by a serious mental illness. The path since then .for him (and for those who love him) has been long and complicated. But I learned deeply three lessons about mental, illness from this long journey: -• ® It can happen to anyone in our town or to anyone's child. ® It is much more common'than generally assumed since because of stigma, people do not announce it widely. Since I have spoken more openly of my stricken friend, I have met scores of fellow 'Petalumans who told me that they or their child or their friend have or have had such an illness, ® People can get better and do well. Ii is not a curse, but' a brain illness for which there are ever more successful medicines. 'The boy, now a young man, who is close "to me has recently completed his college undergraduate education. What ,l conclude then from. my personal experience is: that there are many Petaluma families with ,m`embers who have these illnesses; that these "persons" are in fact loved ones; that some of those ill persons are doing quite well and contributing to society in obvious ways; 'and that all are contributing in a mysterious way in that they give us an opportunity to be , compassion : Moreover, I happen to work for Burbank Housing. Burbank has no connection. with the proposed Boulevard Housing for Petalumans with mental linesses, but through Burbank I know of Buckelew because we have contracts with Buckelew for "them to provide support services to their clients. in some Burbank Housing developments. We checked out Buckelew's track record before agreeing to house their clients and were impressed • that they have been doing this work of supporting their clients' independent living well for over 30 years in Marin- County. Burbank's experience with Buckelew has continued that good track record. We have found that Buckelew screens and supports their clients so they will succeed. Buckelew clients have not. been any special problem for us at Burbank, both because they are high .functioning and because Buckelew does as they promise in terms of support services to their clients. so it is really clear. , We have family members and. friends in Petaluma with these illnesses. We love them. With love and support and modern medicines and their own strengths', these stricken Petalumans: can function well and contribute to our town And to support these Petaluma folks in affordable'housing we have a capable and. proven. service provder in Buckelew whose track ,record shows that the understandable fears expressed by some are in fact not warranted in this case. We should proceed to do the right thing and help them. For the good of all, the Buckelew housing development should- ;be approved. Sincerely, John M'org (707) 762 -4850 home, 707- 526 -9782 work 11 0 MtK11)19tr UUMMEKUi AL PAVE .. I Dear Counselpersom. Petaluma needs Bukelew House like it needs another pothole! We believe that the 5,I:.8 million dollars earmarked for construction to house these 15 Sonora. County mentally ill persons would be better spent on our public schools, our elderly citizens, and 'improving our streets. Ms. Ciarnmetti's letter of April 23 asked how we would feel if one of our own family members needed housing due to a mental illness. Our answer to her is that our family, not the government, would be - responsible for our family member. We would make sure they-had shelter, whether in our home or elsewhere. California's schools are rated 50' in .our country,'yet Petaluma has plans to reduce our teachers by 801 If we do not educate our children, what chance of a :Future does our city and state have? Our elderly parents cannot afford housing in Petaluma. How about more housing for the elderly. Let's take care of those who once took care of vs! Petaluma must use its dwindling resources on the citizens of Petaluma, not the citizens of Sonoma County. In fact Petaluma already houses, I believe the number is 6, mentally ill persons at thp. low - income units built on Payra.n_S:treet. When our are ranked first in the nation; when the elderly citizens of petaluma.have secure, affordable housing; when our streets do not resemble the streets' of Baghdad; we will be open to discussing the possibility of housing for mentally ill citizens of other cities. Let's put_. our resources towards bettering our future.. Thousands of our children's education should. take precedence overthe - needs of 15 mentally ill adults. 'We should lake care of our elderly population, by providing affordable housing for seniors. We need to get the necessities of our community taken care of'before we take on more challenges. NIMBY (Not.In My Back Yard) Ms.Ciammetti? That is not the issue here. Instead let's make sure `our. own backyard is in order before we start taking on the county "s issues. Cliff a.nd.Marcie Stock Petaluma /1+`au3 • 11-1 Mayor David. Glass, and Members of the City Council City Hall 11 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor Glass and Councihnembers: ms Pros mgu know of our p ositive experience in San Rafael with two Buckelew Programs apartment in gs ear downtown San Rafael. In January 2000 Buckelew purchased a 10 -unit apartment building at 7 Mariposa Road in San Rafael- The SanRafael Redevelopment Agency provided some,of the funding for the purchase. As existing .tenants have voluntarily moved out over time, very low - income residents with. a mental illness have moved in. These residents receive supportive services from Buckelew's Marin Assisted Independent Living (MAIL) Program, Currently very low-income MAIL clients occupy 8 of the 10 units. In March 2002 Buckelew completed substantial reliabilitation of the building, including a voluntary seismic upgrade, installation:of fire sprinklers and other repairs: In March 2002 Buckelew°purchased,another small apartment,:bulding, again with San Rafael Redevelopment Agency assistance, at 410 Mission Avenue in San Rafael. Again, .. lienis`have moved in Currently very as existing.tenants have voluntarily moved, ll�LAIL c low-income MAIL clients occupy 8 of the 11 units. R,6hab hiati on is: c rreiid ' ijinderway. Both properties are in residential neighborhoods. City staff has received no complaints from neighbors since Buckelew purchased either building. In addition; neither building had any police calls for service in.2002. San Rafael is most pleased to work with Buckelew to provide: affordable supportive housing forpersons in our community who have a mental illness. I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, • 'Rod Gould City Manager 1400 Fifth Ave., P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael,, CA 94915 -1560 Phone: (415) 485 -3070 Fax: (415) 459=2242 7DD. (415): 485-3198 • Mayor David Glass and Members of the City Council City Hall 1 l 'English'St. Petaluma, CA 94:952 April 22, 2003 Dear Mayor Glass and Members of the City Council: We own. our home next. door`to Draper House, an eight -bed Buckelew Program housing unit in San Rafael, and we are Writing with first -hand experience that may help inform your discussion about situating another Buckelew site in residential Petaluma neighborhood. One of the Draper House's staff members told us that Buckelew is hoping to construct affordable housing in Petaluma for mentally ill adults and .asked us if we would write a letter commenting on our experience with the organization. We first came across our current residence approximately two and a half years ago. During our neighborhood:investigation we dropped in on. all the neighbors, including the tenants at Draper House. Michele.Ludwig, the Program Director, talked with us about Buckelew's work, allaying our reasonable concerns. The staff and clients have been quiet and courteous neighbors. Some of the tenants, of course, seem a bit odd, but none.are threatening or disturbing. It's been an uneventful 30 months but we're confident that Michele and her staff would go out of their way to address any questions or concerns we may have down the road. We hope this information is helpful to you. Please feel free to contact us if you wish to further discuss our experience. Sincerely, Leslie Feldman and Stacey DeGooyer 53 San Pablo Avenue San Rafael, CA 94903 cc: Michele Ludwig cc: Jay Zlotnik • is I .::,`. A DEPARTMENT off' HFALTH AND T TX4 A'NI R 1P_RVTC ->FQZ fT.Y:OFMARIN Larry:Meredith,aPh;D: Director April 21;.2003 Mayor:David Glass, and Members of the City Council City Hall 11 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor Glass and Councilmembers: DIVISION OF COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES I am writing to let you know of;IViarin County's long - standing and positive relationship with Buckelew Programs. SAN PEDRO RD. , STE. 2028 SAN RAFAEL, CA 94903 PHONE: (415) 499 -6769 FAX: (415) 499 -3791 TDD: (415) 499 -6863 Community Mental Health Services, a division of the County's Department of Health & Human Services, has been contracting with Buckelew Programs since the mid- 1970's to provide housing and services to Marin adults. with a- mental illness. Buckelew our clients with a wide range of programs; that include 24 -hour staffed group homes, day treatment, and independent living services: In the early 1980's. Buckelew was a pioneer in the development of independent living services for our clients, through its Marin Assisted Independent Living (MAIL) program. Over the years this program has -grown substantially, and it is now an integral part -of our system of • conununrt y. cane. Buckelew has alsobeen instrumental in the development and/or acquisition of - affordable housing for clients whoreceive support services through the program. I understand that in 1999, the County of Sonoma began contracting with Buckelew for services that are now provided through Buckelew"s SCIL (Sonoma County Independent Living) program, which has been modeled after the successes achieved here in Marin. The County of Marin continues its association with Buckelew Programs because the organization has a long track record of providing excellent services. It does this ina collaborative manner that is sensitive to the needs of "our mutual clients, but also to the needs of affiliated agencies, and the communities within ,which Buckelew's services are located. I understand that Buckelew has been awarded a HUD grant to construct housing for Sonoma County.'clients,who have a mental illness. This grant also comes with long - tern subsidies that will enable the to'be affordable to the tenants. In the mid- 1980's and again in the:mid- .1990's, Buckelew received similar,grants,that led to the creation of affordable housing for a total of 28 clients.. -One site is in, Fairfax, and another is in Novato, and both have proven to be excellent resources for our clients. I encourage you to take advantage of the opportunity before you and approve Buckelew's proposal to create similar housing and services in Petaluma. Sincerely, Bruce Gurganus • Mental Health Director FROM RILL' GOPDNF=R Fnx PIO. : 7075444406 Mayor David Glass, a;nd Members of the City Council City Hall 11 English Street Pelalurna, CA 94952 Dear Editor, Apr. 13 2003 07:53PM P1 April 10; 2003 I am writing to express: my support. for the proposed Boulevard Apartments project that is under consideration for 945 Petaluma Boulevard. I - 1 has a well - thought out plan 'forbous'ing 14 people with a brain disorder. I have been a resident of Petaluma for '53 years and are a registered voter. I have heard of the success of`Ruckelew programs in Marin and Sonoma County. I look forward to this being approved by the City Council to help fill a gaping need for affordable housing in Petaluma. We have a history of supporting affordable housing and this particular project comes with exceilent support systems for the mentally ill. We are lucky to have the commitment of the Buckalew Programs to assist people who find themselves coping with a long -term mentai illness. Our city should do whatever it takes to assure that Boulevard Ariarlments becomes a reality_ Sincerely, LI • April '10, 2003 To the Editor Petaluma Argus- Courier PO Box 1091 Petaluma, CA 94953 Dear Editor, I have lived in Petaluma. for over nine years and I am a registered voter. I am writing to express my support for the proposed Boulevard.Apartments project the Buckel'ew Programs hopes to develop at 945 Petaluma Blvd. I have direct, experience with Buckelew Programs, having worked with their staff and serving as a member of their Board. of 'Directors since August 1998. I can attest IQ the organization's commitment,, follow- through, and responsible oversight of its programs, and its sensitivity to the concerns of • others in the community. People who have a mental illness, and who have shown. themselves to be ready to live in the community, deserve that opportunity as mush as any of us. The tenants who will be living at Boulevard Apartments already reside locally, yet they are challenged— as so many of us are — by the high rents in our area. We should'notpass up this opportunity to build additional affordable housing. Please support this needed and valuable project; it will be an asset to our community. Sincer ly, endall Pacas mith 1707 Ca Court Petaluma, CA 94954 j.' "J a April 10, 2003 • Mayor David Glass, and Members of the Petaluma Ci C.d tY uncrl, City Hall 1.1 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 Dear Mayor and Council. Members: One of the reasons I chose to live in Petaluma was because of the,strong sense of a caring community I felt from the people in, town. A wonderful opportunity to show that spirit is now in our midst. The Boulevard Apartments project that Buckelew Programs hopes to develop at 945' Petaluma Blvd.will provide affordable housing -and support services for adults with ;mental health challenges. Anyone who has ever been close to someone facing' mental illness knows that they need and deserve the samerkinds of programs and services that enable them to live independently as do people with physical disabilities. In fact, the tenants who will be', living at the Boulevard Apartments already reside locally, yet they are challenged as so many of us are - by-the high,rents in our area. Helping everyone to live independently -ar d productively is key to creating a healthy community; both economically and socially: The Boulevard Apartments will bean asset to our community and I strongl "'.urge the City Council to approve this worthwhile project. • DianeSchlactus 191, ,Lohrman Lane Petaluma, CA 94952 i April 7, 2003 To the Editor Petaluma Argus - Courier P.O. Box 1091 Petaluma, CA. 94953 I have been a resident and voter of Petaluma since 1.972 and am writing in support of the "Boulevard Apartments" project proposed to be' located on property at 945 Petaluma Boulevard, by Buckelew Programs. As a professional land surveyor Adobe Associates, Inc., - I have worked with non - profit organizations such as Burbank Housing Development Corporation, Christian Homes and others in providing; low cost housing in Petaluma and Sonoma County. It is always a concern for , residents who, would prefer to have orilyneighbors who are similar • in income and hf iovde a chall n to our l a under tandIn next ao those who are different from ourselves p g g However, those who live with greater challenges than we have reside around us all the time, whether homeless or often struggling to find the support they need. When we find an agency like Buckelew Programs, with a long history of providing needed services and support for those who need it and who are committed to being there long term; it is a gift to our community.. Peoplewho; suffer .from „mental illness and have demonstrated a readiness to live in the community, deserve .that opportunity. As an ordained minister with the 'United Church of Christ in Petaluma and 'a concerned citizen, I urge you to support this project. S. re ` Re aul M. Brown • April 4, 2003 0 Mayor David Glass Members of the Petaluma. City Council City Hall 11 English Street Petaluma,. CA 94952 Dear Mayor Glass and City Council Members: I have lived in Petaluma, for almost 20 years and have worked for 10. years professionally and as a volunteer to advocate for and to develop affordable housing for families, seniors and people with disabilities,. I am writing to express my support for the Boulevard Apartments project that Buckelew Programs has proposed at 945 Petaluma Boulevard. The people of Petaluma and its leaders have a well earned; reputation of supporting and providing .affordable housing:in this community. Few other communities in California have demonstrated the ongongrcommitment to assuring, that as many people as possible have safe, decent,, affordable homes. in which to live. This commitment has and should continue to encompass all who are in need. I work for a nonprofit 'organization that manages three apartment complexes in Marin that are devoted entirely to Buckelew Programs' clients. I have known and worked with members of Buckelew's staff for almost 6 years. This 31 year old nonprofit organization has an outstanding record of providing, programs and services that" success fully enable people with mental illness to become fully functioning, responsible members of the community. Buckelew Programs! offers hope to those who must.. cope with this illness and to-their families and friends. Providing affordable housing is one way of assuring stability in their lives. I hope that the people of Petaluma and the City Council have the vision to see that this is a much needed project and that it will be an asset to our City. Sincerely, �N�-c:� Lynn Berard 436 Gossage Ave. Petaluma, CA 94952 707 - 778 -0850 'P " Ldl �et(Z 71.C7, Ecalnerta',e d PIoperl Colporato gffQce 1 400 Caulfield Lana. • Petaluma, CA N95/4- Phone (707) 762-2336. • Fax (707) 7624657 Email,: pep@'peppropert es ww, w,peppropertieS.01A Mayor David Glass and Members of the City City Hall 11 English St. Petaluma, CA 94952 0 � ;AP 0,2 2003 DR RE: Support of the-Proposed "Boulevard Apartments" sponsored by Buckelew Programs 167 L street Pctaluma, CA 949i,2 Dear Mayor Glass and Members of the City Council, As you know Petaluma Ecumenical Properties has been providing affordable housing in Perallinia, CA 9x1 )52 partnership with the City of Petaluma to low income seniors and persons with disabilities since . 1978. The PEP Board of Directors and staff actively advocate for continued financing for more affordable housing opportunities, and we support and applaud other non - profits IN talunarr I C A �``I "'t 949�i2 p who rovide these services. To that end ' we have had meetings and discussions with 'e the Buckelew staff regarding our I interest in being named their property management company once the building is occupied. We foresee this type of partnership as a "win -win" 1405 Caulfield bane for all' — quality affordable housing for ,persons with mental illness in the Petaluma Peutlum,, CA 949.54 community, and. sound,management by a recognized provider. ut r"Itmr lain Vim I applaud the Petaluma City Council and Housing Division for their support to Buckelew Pev.dmna, CA 94952 through their PCDC and CDBG Programs. HUD has indicated their support making construction and on- going subsidies possible. In addition, the local Department of Mental 1275 Un ker- La Health provides support for agencies like Buckelew to help . residents of our County who I'e-taluma, CA 94954. have a disability. The'Buckelew Program is fortunate that the City has land available for this use, and I urge the Council to go forward with the .needed approvals. Our community will 164 VUilsnn str<:et benefit from additional affordable housing, especially for people who are already living Pcialum a, CA 94952 independently, but struggling with the high cost rentals in our area. �'+1 �V11son street Petaluma has :an impressive history of supporting affordable housing projects — beginning P,e.tal °rn1A,. 949"2 with. PEP in 1978. There is still a. tremendous need, for additional housing; especially for this vulnerable population. We should be pleased that an agency such as Buckelew has i'OQ i09-[)anicl DriVe committed "itself helping deserving residents of our County who, through no fault of their Pc�talt ma, CA 94954 own, must cope with, a long -term illness: Affordable housing goes a long way towards assisting people with a mental ilhiess, and as a community, we should do all we can to assure that the Boulevard Apartments will be a success. I thank you in advance for your hopeful on -going support of the `Boulevard Apartments" 1 � Yours truly, - 1 - Vera R. Ciammetti Executive Director r , . Petaluma Ecumenical Properties U1 J IS[a! /RCN[C77. /.PPoperNf,, l"" t7 noll -p/ly if cot y r,7llU77 o'01,W /d pror7!/i /7!J 77 1y, bl" boll Itig /O /' /ow 111COWt _ .1o"/ - /l/ 1717d Pi'llJt7 /1" IvId (let 7 Adil_l", r, illd/I rnt) Jri1)1)t) 1'l ''en , we" lJ "llb tice 1174' „ /lld /l h/ t'/ /l /t' /N/ 71J /Y, rJt•,7 /�t. RECEIVED F EB 2 5 2003 • P C D C RECEWED iFEB 2 4 2003 MAYOR 7-12010- i 0� ry� By 7 4 42,4 Shay= Miffer rtierty LA2�- e PcwfUM47 4�q 94Y- • 921 Madrone Lane Petaluma, CA 94952 (707)'765-0708 DEIVED FEB 19 2003 MAYOR • • February 17, 2003 Petaluma City Council 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 RE: Buckelew Program Dear Sir or Madam: FEB 2 0 2003 oC 1 used to be a employed as a Bank Teller. an d:one Wednesday morning after opening my Teller Window; was approached by a' nicely dressed woman. l She handed me a note "This is a Robbery, hand over all your cash" I was terrified of my lifer I did as I was instructed to place the monies in the brown paper bag that she gave tome. She left with'the money and ]pressed the button and turned -to my Supervisor and said' "I was just Robbed!!" The police came and took me in their patrol car to scope 'the area if I could identify the woman. I did see her and pointed her out. Later that afternoon, she returned with her husband and apologized and said "I forgot. to take my medication" She had Bipolar Disease and was Psychotic if she didn't take her medication. Well, I have High Blood Pressure which is treated by daily medication. Some days if I have a distracting morning, I forget to take my medication, and by II a. m. have a splitting headache and fortunately I work here in town so I am able to come home to take my medication. I strongly oppose of the Buckelew Program because I have two (2) young children that sometimes walk to school and always walk Page 2 home from school I FEAR for their lives to have people living so close to us with ,these type of mental disorders. I still paranoid just` with my children walking home or walking to school as it is. With people with these type .of mental disorders living so close to us will make .my comfort zone of Petaluma not too comfortable. I STRONGL` 7 OPPOSE of this Buckelew Program.. If you should have any questions please feeljree to contact me at (70 7) 76S- 0708. Sincerely, `William 'W. Keka J 40 Janice M. Keka • • It is human nature to fear what we don't know - -- particularly in an area that holds • ,as much stigma and misconceptions as mental illness. Issues: 1. Safety: individual tenants are screened by two agencies and have a history of living independently and responsibly in the community 2. Medication: That individuals take medication for serious mental illness is no different than a diabetic taking insulin for diabetes. 3. Diagnosis of schizophrenia, bi -polar disorder, psychosis: .I doubt that someone who is actively psychotic would pass the screening. Given the labels of schizophrenia and bi -polar disorder, I doubt that one can infer violence and mayhem. 4. Location: what would you claim to be an appropriate location? It is important to remember that people with.a mental health diagnosis are first people (and not their label). It is important to listen, ask questions, and voice your concerns — with an open mind. The state of Mental Health today is where Mental Retardation Developmental Disabilities was , in the 1950's 0 November 19, 2003 Community Development Dept. Planning Division City of.Petaluma 11 English St. Petaluma, Ca. 94952 TO WHOM IT MAYCONCERN: We strongly oppose the proposed building of the facility next to the Police Station for mentally ill people. This is not an appropriate location for such a facility. This is a family neighborhood with numerous children. These mentally ill people will be able to come and go as they please which concerns all of the people `living in the neighboring areas. If a facility like this is needed in Petaluma, which has not been determined yet, it should be. as far away from residential areas as possible. Sincerely, t Mary & Jima Duensinng . 121 White Oak Circle Petaluma, Ca. 94952 • r November 25, 2003 Dear Planning Division, We believe that there is a very strong need for housing for our minorities who are disadvantaged in various ways. The mentally ill are one such group andBuckelew, in Marin and in Sonoma Counties, has clearly demonstrated their ability to assist this group. Petaluma is fortunate that Buckelew has obtained the various fundsi needed to build this complex, and also fortunate that Buckelew Will manage the complex and provide ongoing services to the residents. Its placement.in a largely industrial: area helps to reduce the NIMBY objections although I am sure you will hear some of those. The fact of a resident manager along with the regular support services provided by Buckelew should greatly minimize any problems which some people will ascribe to housing for the mentally ill. And, please remember, Buckelew will only allow the very high functioning mentally ill adults to be residents there. The scarcity of low income housing- throughout the county is well documented and this scarcity is greatly multiplied for those afflicted with a mental illness. With decent housing and proper support services it has been shown that many such people can and will make the transition from SSI/SDI or even welfare to productive wage earners; thus cutting the social service costs now borne by city and county. We urge you to consider favorably this housing complex as proposed by Buckelew. We urge this for both humanitarian and economic concerns. • Thank you. John & Liz Maxwell 11820 Mill Street Petaluma, CA 94952 • November 23, 2003 • Community Development Department Planning Division I I English St. . Petaluma, CA. 94.952 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing as a concerned citizen regarding the ,proposed. Boulevard Apartments at 945 Petaluma Blvd. North (City File'Number: W -ZOA- 0405 -CR) and under the auspices of the Buckelew Programs. It is my understanding that additional neighborhood meetings that were promised. by Buckelew and City Staff have not occurred. At the very least, these meetings would have allowed those of us unable to attend the February 20th meeting at Old Elm Village a chance to voice our serious concerns about this project. Now the.scheduling of a meeting two days prior to Thanksgiving, when many of us will be traveling, is very suspect and appears to be an attempt. on your part to stem attendance and the likely opposition. The November 19th murder of an Alameda psychiatrist which was committed by one of her patients serves as a warning signal when viewed in conjunction'with the comment by Buckelew's Jay Zlotnick that, "neighbors should report erratic or violent behavior to Buckelew before contacting police." The proposed location adjacent to many neighborhoods `filled with young children also causes me to have serious questions about the parai meters employed. in choosing a location site. Certainly this fact alone and the obvious safety concerns should result in reconsideration of the proposed site. Do the facts that the residents will not be supervised and that a police station is nekt'door present another indication that the residents -- who are afflicted with "major mental illnesses who must take medication (quote from Alice Thomas of Buckelew) - are truly a potential danger and consequerntly, the close proximity to a police station might provide de facto supervision? A very disconcerting scenario! In light of the aforementioned, I implore you`to reconsider.the proposed location. Sincerely, Brian Rademacher 216 White Oak Circle Petaluma, CA. 94952 Rosemary McCreary 6055 Lichau Road Penngrove , CA 94951 mccrearyrh@aoL com 707- 664 -1879 fax 664 -9476 Community Development Department Planning Division City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma CA 94952 Regarding the proposed affordable housing complex for Buckelew Sonoma County client members, please consider -the tremendous affirming benefit for the fourteen low- income and mentally ill people who will reside here. This kind of housing is critical not only for their mental well- being-, but zlso for their emotional lives. They must know that the community at -large supports them and does not cast them out, leaving them in many cases stranded and without shelter. This is critically needed housing.:Please give it your support. Thank you. Sincerely, Rosemary . McCreary 7 • KECEIVE . R JAN 19 7004 vOMMUN(s4 1)tVtbl.QVN)01 OWRTMENI This is to inform residents ofPetaluma that on February 2, the City Council will make a controversial decision on a proposal for Buckelew, a Marin non= profit, to ereate housing for 14 mentally ill adults at 945 Petaluma Blvd North for a period of 40 years. The non - resident population has been diagnosed as schizophrenia and bipolar disorders. Mentally ill convicts are Buckelew clients under Buckelew's FACT program and will qualify as residents of.this proposed project. All of these adults must,be on medication in order to function, but - they will not be supervised and will be responsible for taking1heir own meds. There is no pharmacy near the:proposed'facility. Because of the legal privileges of patient- doctor confidentiality, both the residents' illnesses and their criminal histories will not be made public. The business and residential community's concern is that this project does not hold any structure, for this group, meaning there will be no supervision. There is a high percentage of this population who resist taking medication, and the plan for this facility does not include any clinical supervision or any health care professional in charge of monitoring the patients' daily meds intake. In effect, this will be a hospital without doctors or nurses where the patients are responsible for their own meds. Clearly, the proposed facility represents a safety issue to both Petalumans and Buckelew patients. There will be many incidents where the police, ambulance, and fire department will become involved when a Buckelew psychotic suffers an episode. At a Planning Commission meeting, Buckelew representatives asserted that there had not been "a single problem" at an existing facility in Novato similar to the one proposed for Petaluma. There was a semantic element of truth to this Buckelew statement.in fact, ;there have been over 70 documented police calls to the Novato facility, so not "a single problem" is correct in that there have.been many more than one. Many of the logged Novato 911 calls involve threatened suicides and requests by Buckelew patients for assisted suicide by police officers. Can Petaluma afford the shared community anxiety and municipal expense associated with'so many 911 calls (calculated at $900 an hour) emanating from one residence? This unpublicized and. controversial project is being fast - tracked through City Council' for vote on February 2, 2004. To date, there has been no public forum, discussion, or debate on the proposed Buckelew project. Despite this information blackout, over 300 residents and• businesses have signed petitions protesting the project. It is critical that you write your City Council, .11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952-2610 immediately and•:request your City Council vote "NO!:" on the proposed.Buckelew project. Setter, yet, attendthe February `2 meeting and make yourself be heard and seen before the City Council. Buckelew representatives and contractors will be therein, force to Jilfluence the City Council, and without your visible participation, this dangerous facility•inay quickly take root in our community. Regards, Russel Pleech, Petaluma resident Vote N0! on Buckelew project supported by: 300+ residents and business neighbors, Rubie Amramov, MFT -Psychotherapist r 3 1 � r •