HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 7.A-Attch03 06/21/2004W
2
3
4
5
17
18
19
20
0 1
1
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
CITY OF; PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Conlin unity Development neat, Planning Division, .11 EnglishStreet, Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 778 =4301 Fax e 7) 778 -4498 E- m' ailsnlanning@ci.Petalerma.ca.us
DATE: April 22, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO. I
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Betsi Lewitter; Project Planner
SUBJECT: PETALUMA VILLAGE MARKETPLACE
FINAL SUBSEQUENT ,ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
"
STAFF RECOMMEN ®At .
Staff recommends that' the Planning `Comrni "ssion forward a recommendation to the City Council
to certify the Petaluma Village Marketplace, Subsequent Environmental Impact. Report as
adequate. If the Commission recommends certi'ficati:on, they;may hen consider the project itself.
If the Commission does not recommend ,certification, there is no reason to consider the project,
since the only recommendation they can offer the Council.is project denial
BACKGROUND
In 1991, the entire 72.47 -acre River Oaks/Petaluma FactoryOutlet'Village project site was zoned
Planned Community D'istric:t, Floodplain Combining and Floodway (P- C „,PF -C and FW), and a
Planned Community District (PCD.)'Master Plan Program was approved subject to 55 conditions
of approval. Parcel A was subsequently developed as the Petaluma Village Premium Outlets; the
applicants are now propos ng`to develop Parcels B and C.
An Environmental Iinpaet. Report= (EIR) was certified as adequate, for the, original project.
However, condition of approval. 5:1 required appropriate environmental' analysis in conjunction
with any application for modifi''cation of the PCD Master Plan. A Draft Subsequent
Environmental Impact; Report (DSEIR) was. prepared' by Larnphier- Gregory and released for -
public comments tin November 2002. Although a. Subsequent. EIR is a complete EIR, it focuses 1. mainly on new h formation and substantial changes `to a project and, therefore does not, revisit
many of the topics - addressed in the original EIR 'for a project. The DSEIR idenfified several
potential environmental ,impacts associated with development of the project that would be
Petaluma t Boul an d
evarduNortlr/�Washin pacts included', unacceptable levels of service at the
g g ton Street intersection and on segments of Old Redwood'
Hi gh wa y. Miti ation measues were proposed to reduce the impacts to a less than significant
level. However ;the mitigation measures require extensive improvements to intersections, the
ATTAC H M ENT 3
Page 1
I provision of a new east /west ,connection and freeway interchange and Council adoption of a.
2 policy exempting ,key downtown intersections from General Plan Level of Service thresholds.
3 Until such tune , as the improvements are completed and the language in the General Plan
4
modified,, the impacts would remain � sigriificant and unavoidable. In addition, new traffic
5 generated by the, project would °affect air quality by increasing; regional, emissions by amounts
6, greater than Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) sIgnifcance thresholds.
7 Mifigation..measures would. reduce the amount of emissions, brut the remaining amount, would
8 still exceed the BAAQMD s gni'f"cance thresholds.
9
1'o The Planning .Commission held a public hearing on. the DSEIR on January I4thr.and 2�8`h of this
11 year. At the conclusion of the public; comments, the Planning :Commissioners reviewed the,
12 DSE�IR and recommended clarifications and the incorporation of additional information= into the
13 document. The Planning Commission then authorized. staff to initiate and supervise preparation.
14 of a Final Subsequent Environmental ,Impact Report (FSEIR), which responds to all s'ignificant'.
,15 environmental points raised' during the 45 day public review period. The courts have justiRed
16 the :requirement for lead` agencies . to, seek and respond, to public comments asi 1.)' sharing
1'7 expertise,; 2) disclosing, agency analysis" 3)�' checking for accuracy; 4)- detecring. omissions; 5)
18 discovering public.concerns;. and: 6,) soliciting, counterproposals,
1,9 �
20, The Commission requested 'that the applicant' install' story poles to depict, the 'height and mass of
21 the proposed structures on both Parcels B� and C prior to consideration' of the Final SEIR and the
22' project. 'The installation of the story poles was; completed on April 8. For more information;
23 please see, the project staffreport.
2 ,
25 An Environmental Impact Report is an, informational ,document required by the California
26 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to inform the decision - makers and the public generally of
27' the - ;significant environmental effect. of a project. It dentif es possible ways to .minimize the
28 signifcant,e.ffects and describes reasonable alternatives to the, project.. CEQA Secti "on 15204(a)
29 states that,
30
31 ". adequacy o:f an EIR is determined in terms. of'what is reasonably feasible,
32, in light of factors such as the - ,magnitude , of the:,proj'ect, the severify of its Iikely:
33: environmental impacts,. and the geographic scope of the project. '.CEQA does not
34 require 'a °lead agency to conduct .every ,test or perform all research, .study ; and
35 experimentation recommended or demanded by comm_entors. When responding to
36 comments, lead agencies -need on'l'y respond to significant ,environmental, issues
37 - do not need to,,provide all information requested by reviewers; as long as a
38 good faith effort at full'discl:osure is made in the EI
39.
4o Although economic or social information ,may be included. in an EIR, they are not o 'be treated as
41 significant effects on the environment (CE:QA6ection 15131.).
42
43' In addition, an, EIR is not legally. inadequate; if experts :in, a particular °en-vi'ronmental subject
44; matter disagrece with the conclusions reached by' the: experts whose studies were :used in draffing
45 the EIR. Insuch instances,. the EIR only:need's jo„ summanze `the main pointsi of disagreement. and. -
46 ex ,lain the lead agency's ' reasons for acce p tin one�set, of judgments instead .of., another Section,
p P g' J STr� _
47 15..151).
,Rage 2
2 CEQA requires that the SEIR be certified prior tolproject approval. In order to certify the SEIR,
3 the' decision- making body must conclude: .1) that the document has been completed in
4 compliance with CEQA 2) that the decision- making body has reviewed and. considered the
5 information in the; EIR 'prior to approving the project; and 3) that the final EIR reflects the lead
6 agency's independent judgment and analysis.
7
8 CEQA requires the decision- making :agency to balance' the economic, legal, social,
9 technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable avoidable environmental
10 impacts when determining `whether to approve a project (Section 15093). If the lead agency
1l decides to approve a- project in spite of`its significant adverse impacts,''two sets of findings must
12 be made. The first set of findings must state how the lead agency has;responded to the significant
13 effects identified in the EIR;, the' second set of findings must state how the specific economic,
14 legal, social, technological or':other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable
15 adverse impacts. This second set of findings is formally known as a "Statement of Overriding
16 Conditions ".
17
18 PUBLIC COMMENTS
19
20 A total of 123 comments (including, a petition) were received 'in response to the Notice of
21 Preparation of the Subsequent EIR. Of these, 46 offered comments on the environmental review.
22 These comments have been responded to in the Final SEIR.
�3
24 ATTACHMENTS
25
26 Attachment A: Petaluma Village Marketplace Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report
27 (provided to each Commissioner at the April 8, 2003, PIanning, Commission meeting)
28
g p rreport4- 22- 03.doc
29 S: \PC- Planning 'Commission \Re orts\PYMdsei
0
•
Page ,3
k' n �
• 1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
z MEMORANDUM
3
4 Community Developmeni Department; Planning Dnvision,,11. English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
5 (707) 778=4301 Fat (70.7) 778 -4498 E-mail s,planning�a�ci.petahimaxa.us
6
7 DATE: April 22, 2'003 AGENDA ITEM NO. II
8
9 . TO: Planning Commission
10
ii FROM: Betsi `Lewitter, Project, Planner
12
13 SUBJECT` PETALUMA VILLAGE MARKETPLACE MODIFICATION OF RIVER
14 OAKS/PETALUMA FACTORY OUTLET VILLAGE'MASTER PLAN
15 "
16 Rft-OMMEWDATWW
17
18,
19
20
J,
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
31
38
39
40
41
44
Staff recommends that, if `the Planning Commission recommended. to the City Council
certification of the Final S Environmental'Impact' Report, the :Planning Commission
forward a recommendation td'the City.Council regarding proj`ect,approval.
Preliminary conditions of approval are =attached as Attachment A. Applicable conditions of
approval for the River Oaks /Petaluma Factory Outlet, Yillage remain in effect. For the
Commissioners' convenience, a.copy.of the original City Counci1 resolution approving the PCD
Master Plan Program, with conditions is attached as Attachment B' Additional conditions from.
the Engineering 'Division, Public Facilities and .'Services and the. Fire Marshal relating to project
design wi ll be imposed at the; tirrie;of SPARC approval. "
Project: Petaluma VillageMarketplace
2-200 Petaluma Boulevard North,
Parcel A: APN 048- 080 -039 007 - 401 -043, 007401-044,,
`Parcel B:. APN 007-391 -009
P'a'rcel C: APN 048. - 080 -038, .
Abandoned Railroad Right -of -Way 048- 080 -033 and 007 -391 -03.5
Project File N REZ02001'
Project Planner: Betsi" Lewitter
Project Applicant '°Chelsea Group
i
Property Owners Ch elsea.'Property Group
"Page.]
I
2
3
5
7
8
0
10
13
14
15
17
18
19.
20
21
2 2
23
25"
26
27
.28
29
30
31
32
w. ,
33,
.34
35
36
37
38,
39
•40
4
42
43
44
45
46
Nearest Cross Street to Project Site. Corona Road
Pfopeirty Size:, 72,47 'acres,
Site Cha'jracterigtics The. River Oaks . /Petalurna Factory. Outlet Village Planned
Commun bistn'c't site cons of 'a total o02.47 acres. The site
is divided' nto three 1parcels for plan ' Parcel C is'the
most northern parcel (APN 048'-0.80-038) .;and is '1.6.-3+/ - acres, in
size Parcel A is the central parcel (APN -0'48_ -
043 and 007 consists of 25+/- acres, and J_s !developed
with the retail outlets, and ,appurteriances- and'Parcel B is the most
sotithem, parcel (APN 007494 -09) and is 22.9+/ acres in area. In
additi'on,- abandoned railroad tight-of-Wa
�,y (APN, 048480 �
033 arid.'007 =39'1- 035) eonssting,ofapproxirnately 8.28 acres.
The undevelobed'portiofts, of the site aft rdlative'ly flat A
total of
1,47 acres df' potential jun wetlands, occur on the ;ixf,
the form of seasonal; wetlands, emergent marsh and riparian
habitat.
Existing Use,:
ProposiM,Use:
, Current" Zoning:
Proposed Zoning;
The.Petaluma, Vactory Ou'tl'et Village is. located, on Parcel A Parcel
8, Cand the an-done.d ate vacant.
Develo of u p 0 173,, 00 gross square feet, of c6mrnercial,
,
retail, uses, on Parcel B and,,,a'12-scree'n movie tiYeatef and A,36,000.
retail building
commercial I I on Parcel C.
Planned. C , , orn.mun-ity Dis.ffict, flbodplain Combining and I Floodway
(PC -PF-C'aAd, FW) (P-C)
Planned Community -Dist Floodphiin Combining and. FloodWay
(P-C, PF- (C and F_W) -(P-.Q
Current General klaft LA''nd'Use: Special C ornmer6al
Proposed Gener,,Al Plan Land Use: 'Special C(5fnmerc,l al
StiWequent Actions after Planning 'Cofilinissi ; y
Wit R 'e
9 City Council review and certification of the; S
ubsequentEIR
0 1 review an approval' f th d
City, uncil r. o, - e,mo 1'ficafion'to the River Oaks/Petaluma Factor
Outlet Village. Master Plan.
4 Site Plan and. Ar chitectural ectural Review Comrnittee approval-.
• 'Improvement Plans
• Building Permits
J
PR DESC - RI TIO"
2
3 BACKGROUND_
4
6:. Combining and Floodwa acre C FW n and a P1 ed munity District, - Floodplain
g Y p_ J
5 In '1991 'the entire 72.41'_ acre, l- )� l m Cornmumty District (PCD)
7 Master Plan Program Was approved, „subject to 55 conditions of approval. With'the zoning of the
9 occur at this location' GD,, it was determineq, that, some kind of commercial development would
8 entire 72± acres to P
Parcel A was subse uently developed as the Petaluma Village Premium
10' Outlets; the applicants are now proposing to develop the remain °ing port'ior s of the site, known as
1 F Parcels B and C.
12
13 An Environmental Impact Report (E'IR) was,,certifed as adequate for the original projeet. The
14 original EIR contemplated the development of retail restaurants, ' hotel /motel and related
15 services, offices, and financial institutions on the 72 +[- site. The PCD Master Plan Program
16'. provided details regarding the.`proposed retail rfactory outlet stores on Parcel A. However, uses
17' for Parcels B and C were .not specifically known and', therefore, could not be analyzed
1.8 thoroughly. Condition of approval.51 required appropriate environmental analysis in conjunction
1:9 with any application for modification, of'the PCD Master Plan.
20
21 A Draft Subsequent .Environmental Impact Report' ( DSEIR) was prepared by Lamphier= Gregory
10 2 and released for public. comments 'in November 2002. After .public hearings, on the DSEIR, the
3 Commission directed staff 4o initiate, and : supervise preparation 'of the Final Subsequent
24 Environmental Impac,;t:Report (FSEIR),, which responded to all significant environmental points
25 raised during the 45 -day public review period. The ;project cannot be approved unless the SEIR
26. is certified as adequate. After • .review of the FSEIR, ' if the -Commission recommended
27 certification of the document 'to the City Council, they may then proceed with review of the
28 project itself. If. the Commission recommended that the FSEIR not be eertified'as adequate, the
29 there is no reason to consider the project, since the only recommendation they can offer the.
30 Council is project denial.
31
32 The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) <reviewed'theiproject on August 22,
33 2002. The Committee e xpressed,concern regarding•the,expansive amount of parking area, lack of
34 linkage between the,;si;tes, -the instal latfon.of,another „signal light on Petaluma Boulevard North,
35 and the architecture” looking; too much tike: `Disneyland:. The importance of the . build'ing
36 architecture addressing 101 was emphasized. Access to t} eproposed theater on Parcel
37 C was discussed including the ;lack of pedestrian-: :friendly areas for drop off and pick up.
38 Flooding was -also a 'concern— Committee suggested that the detention ponds and creeks be
39 used as an amenity forrythe proj'eet.
40
41 APP ROVAL REQUESTED
42
43 The applicants are; proposing to develop Parcel C, which comprises 16.3 ,acres to the north of the
40, existing Petaluma Village Premium Outlets, with ;a . 10 to 12 screen movie theater and a 36,000
square foot retail budding, The ,structures would be located along the abandoned railroad right-
Page ,3
�-
1 of way adjacent to Highway 101 'Parking would be rocated on the wesi side of parcel outside
2 the buffer,area along the Petaluma River similar to the existing;parking for the outlet stores.
3
4 Parcel B, consisting of almost 23 acres, would be developed with fve retail buildings totaling
5 approximately 173,40:0 square feet. These would also be aligned along the abandoned railroad
6 right -of -way_ adjacent to Highway 10 L, The ex_'st parking pattern for the :outlet stores would
7 be continued with the; provision of add itibnal.;parking, on the west, side of the parcel', outside the
8 ' river buffer area.
9
10 . A. total of 2,41.2" parking spaces are to be• provided at the site, including the existing 962 for the
11 outlet stores, 527's ces for.Parcel Q. and 923spaces for Parcel B.
12
13 Because of the„possibility of hydrocarbons. from auto fluid leakage and heavy metals from tires
14 and brake pad's, being conveyed to the, Petaluma River and/or -creeks from :storm water runoff,
15 water will, be 'conveyed either through cateh' basins . info dissipation structures from where'it wi'll'.
1`6 percolate into vegetated swales or water will, sheet flow to 'openings :in, the urban, curbs to the:.
17 vegetated 'swales., The `swales are intended to. 'filter the contain °inants aut- of '.the w_ at'er prior 'to
18 flowing °.into, the Petaluma River' and/or creeks: .
19
20 Outlet Mall Drive off Petaluma Boulevard North currently provides- access ;to. the existing outlet
21 stores A new roadway, Village Drive; would be constructed to also link Parcel B to Petaluma
22 Boulevard North. 'V'ehicular access between °Parcel 'C and A is provided through the. parking
24 Capri..Creek;- automobile, Circulation between Parcel, $ and, A would be g r s prodded across
23 areas To minimize. the necessary creek crossin only a edestnan brid e
p ovrded ,behind the:
25 buiadings 'in the parking area ,adjacent to Highway 101. The location of ,this vehicle connection
26 between Parcels B and A would die- emphasize it. as a route for through. traffic.:and would:
27 probably.only serves a sniall volume of intra- slopping'ceriter vehicle trips.
28
29 The existing riveiwalk on. Parcel. A would tie ektended lo. Parcel B and. Parcel C fo provi'de
30 bicycle arid, pedestrian connections between the three parcels as well�as� to. provide public access
31 along ,the:,Petaluma River. .
32
33; Landscaping includes informal clusters of 0' tive'trees to enhance the riparian areas at, the
34 southernmost edge of the parking area 'in' parcel B, "the preservation "of existing trees in'sorn&,
35 locations, the planting..of flowering accent trees in parking -lots; and special paving in entry, and
36 crosswalk.. areas.
37
38 SETTING
39 -
40 The;proJ 'ect site is located generally west of Highway 101 and east of Petaluma Boul'evard.North
41 approximately 2,000 feet south ofCor Road. This, section of Peta`luina rs - referred. to as the
pp i y ng stretch of the Petaluma :River: The �Ri'ver runs
42 Corona Reach an a - roximatel.:.one mile Jong
43 from north to south, adjacent.to and' through .the western portion of the 'site..'The Corona Creek.
44 remnant is the northem'houndary of`Parcel C Capri 4is the northern boundary of Parcel B
45 and an unnamed drainage (soinetimes called. Deer Creek) bisects the southern, portion, of Parcel
46; B.
47'
Pa'ge.4
developed, with t
. I Parcel A, consisting; of 25 'acres,.. is currently „he Pefalurna Village Premium
2 Outlets. Parcel B, to the south of Parcel A, is , al- most;'23 acres. Parcel C,, to the north of Parcel A,.
3 is approximately 1 6 acres. The entire development, site includes -approximately 8.28 acres of
4 abandoned railroad right -of- -way.
5
6 The Petaluma Livestock Auction Yard and vacant land_ exist to the north of Parcel C; a mixture
7 of .light industrial, single and multiple family residential,, mobile home park and vacant land
8 occur to the east across Highway 1101. The 'Northwestern Pacif c Railroad tracks and vacant land
9 are to the south. A mixture of highway commercial uses is located along Petaluma Boulevard
1o, North on the west side of the Petaluma. River.
1.1
12 Location maps and aerial photographs are contained within the DSEIR.
13
14 STAFF ANALYSIS
15
1.6 General Plan Consistency
17 The entire 72+ acre site was designated Special Commercial in .1991 prior to the' development of
1'8 the retail outlet stores. According to the definitions of land use categories in the General Plan
19 document, "This designation „is intended to complement the City ,existing retail base, and to
20 :produce sales tax revenue. Special Commercial, areas provide- sites for creative,, well - designed,
21 master- planned commercial; facili'ti'es that, add significantly to the ':City's tax base, by capturing
2 2 local dollars that now
g rqj l p rovde 00 new square feet 6f 3, destination -onent d o'rnmerc al retail, fact pies.ect will over 200 0
1024 a
25 Chapter 2 of the DSEIR, `Land .Use I and Planning Policy, list5; seyen central goals of
26 Petal'uma's General Plan' acid how the goals 'relate to the project (!Page 2 -7). The project's
27 consistency with specific General Plan - policies relating to Community Character; Land Use and
28 Growth Management; The Petaluma River; Open Space, Consery ation and Energy; Parks,
29 Recreation, Schools and Child Care, Visual. Quality and Aesthetics; Local Economy; Housing;
30 Transportation and Community Hea'ltli and Safety is also reviewed on pages 2 -8 through 2 -17 of
1 the
measures DS IR. The SE new a that th proposed development, of Parcels B and C, with mitigation
3
ast /west connector and Highway 1,01 interchange) , and conditions of
33 approval, would be consistent °with these policies The consisfeiky of these policies with the
34 entire project was determined "at the. time of the certification..of the original' E1R. Conditions of
35 approval: were then imposed on the project to clarify and /or reinforce, the policies. Similarly,
36 conditions of approval will be .imposed with this phase of the site development:
37
38 The General Plan Circul'afion Map identifies: an arterial roadway parallel to and west of Highway
39 10 which would' pass through the project site.. Condition °of approval 23` for the River
40 Oaks/Petaluma Factory Outlet Village PCD Master Plan Program -required a north / south
41 collector road in increments. Excerp_ `ts from the condition and the developer's responses' are listed
42 below:
43
44 Condition 23.A. A temporary emergency road to the Petaluma Factory Out Village (Parcel A)
wild be provided from Corona Road.
„
' 5
1 Res, pon-se A 'temporary , emergency access road was made avalla during construction on •
2 Parcel A� sand is still available by a recorded access easement.
3
4 Condition - 23.R. The collector road along: the Petalumal Factory Outlet Village shall be
p y i g p ° n g either Parcel B
5° corn' leted concurrent I
: with the first le or portion of the collector road servi
6 or C'
7
8 Response: No r16rth / south collector road has been developed between Corona Road and Parcel
9 A.
10
11 Condition 23..0 &D. As deemed appropriate through specific project environmental review for
12 Parcels B -and "C, ..development approvals for ,Parcels '13 and C, may require completion of the
13 length of the collector road connecting the ;Petaluma. Factory Outlet Vi11'age to either' the
14 proposed east /west overpass or Petaluma: Boulevard North,
1 -5
F6 Response.: No south collector road has-been developed between Corona Road and' Parcel
17 A : 7 The : proposed east /west overpass is not currently being pursued .by the City of Petaluma, and
18 the a City has not identified. the location where a collector road would ' intersect.,, Petaluma
19 , Boulevard North:
20
2,1 Condition 23. E: It is recognized that the 'Crty.:..:may,` need! fo utilize the,power of eminent domain
22 to :obta'i'n necessary right -of -way outside the; boundaries ,of'the. River Oaks ''PCD 'Master Plan
p y e of development proposal for Parcels B and/or, C:.
23 ro•ect _area , sub`ect to need and anal sr
'_seat tim
24
25 Response: To :date, the City has not exercised rts "right of eminent domain to acquire right -.of
26 way beyond the b�oundanks `of theproject: sit e for developments of 'a collector road.,
27
28 In addition, the traffic study for the project determined that a road linking project ,site :to
29 Corona Road 'would."not be needed to accommodate 'the project's traffic since the ,streets and
30 intersections. at the periphery,• of_ the project, site �have' adequate capacity to :operate acceptably
31, without this; addrt'iona'1 roadway `Therefore; no such' road. is included in the rproject, plans,.
.32 although the site des'i`gn would .still allow a 'roadway to be •extended through the project, site to
33' ,Corona Road.
34
35 Policy 31, of the General Plan Transportation ,Section states that,, ` °Land use, decisions shall be
3,6' based , on poientiat; traffic impact:" The project. would result in. unacceptable 'Levels of Service
37. (LOS) at .key Dintersections and' segments of Oldt Redwood Highway including the highway
38 overpass dunng,sorne,peak ;hours. Currently,."the,General Plan Transportation S:ectiori only
3:9 that the LOS .for City .streets shall deteriorate below level C and an cases th'e streets
4.0 already .operate 'at LOS D, - they' shall ndt deteri .to. `t h e' next lower level. Intersections, are. no,t
41 addressed. Proposed, m itl g afions include major improvements to streets and intersections and ahe
42 adoption of a policy by- the City Council stating, that key downtown intersections ,are: exempt
43 from LOS thresholds. The City Council will need to determine if the traffic? impacts can be
44 feasibly mifigaJtgd or whether the impacts are considered acceptable because overriding ._
j ( ") P :s benefits outweigh the impacts. 'It should be'noted that
P J
45 considerations indicate that' the ro ect'
46 Ob' "d m the Trans" ortation sectl'on isJo, "Reduce the impacts of Highway 101 traffic on
03
Page 6
I Petaluma, and vice ver"sa." By providing a movie theater and additional .retail opportunities
2 within the City 1 "emits; 'Petalumans wi.11 not have to use Highway` 101 to reach movie theaters Or
3 retail' centers to ,the north or south:
5 Zoning District Consistency
6 • The site was zoned Planned Community District, Floodplain ng and Floodway (P -C, PF-
7 C and FW) in 1991 The P -'C zoning designation is used for large tracts of land to encourage
8 innovative design and compatibili #y of uses. It is expected.that theAevelopment of a P -C district
9 will proceed by, increments. Approval. of." a Planned unif °Program which outlines the
• Comm y ,
� or ii
to, boundaries and character of''the location -.of ro osed u ses an d amenities, and locations of
11 streets and access ways isi re q wired f the Planned Cotnmur t.y:
12
73 The Floodplain Combining District (FP - 'C) is�applied'to areas within the boundaries of the " -Area
14 of Special Flood Hazard "; b,ut ,outside -the Floodway areas. Development is , ,permitted : upon
15 submittal of specific i'nformatiorr , and issuance of ,a development ip erm :The Floodway District
16 (F -W) includes all areas within the�boundarie.s of the "Area of Sp.eeial Flood Hazard" and within
17 the Floodway areas. No new construction, "intensification of existing uses or other development
1.8 is permitted with the exception of specific uses such.'as parking lots. A small portion of the site
19 immediately adjacent to the 'Petaluma River is considered Floodway. As with the existing
20 development on Parcel A, only the 'parking areas and the Riverwalk' on. Parcels B and C are
21 intended to be located in° the,Floodway area.
22
10 3 The original approval for the ,River Oaks /Petaluma Outlet Village 'included a Master 'Plan"
4 Program that addressed. requirements of the Pl "anned Community 'Program. The document
25 focused mainly on the development of the 25 -acne Petaluma Village Premium Outlets. Uses
26 listed for the remainder of th'e' site; included additional retail facilities restaurants, hotel /motel
27 and related se 'rvices,, offices, financial institutions and 'other .uses. The :applicants are now seeking
28 a modification to the Master Plan by requesting approval of the Petaluma Village Marketplace
29 Planned Community District, 'General Development Plan dated (2/02/02. The new document
30 lists permitted principal and accessory uses for the Planned CommunityDistrict. (Although- the
31 document states conditional uses are, also listed, none appear. This'wilt need be clarified by the
32 applicant.) The list of permitted uses is consistent- with, the intent of the Special Commercial
33 General Plan, designation. The ,document' also contains information regarding building locations,
34 architecture and materials landscape principles (including susta`ibdbility), drainage guidelines,
35 circulation and the RiV&w.alk. (Please see below for the document''s consistericywith the River
36' Access and Enhancement.Plan:)
3.7 „
38 Consistency with,Any Other'Adopted,.Plans
39 Petaluma R, er Ace.ess and`Enhancernent Plan
0 The
41 Plan.. the Pilan whi hWwas ad'o ted in .1.996. T Petaluma River. ° Access and; ;Enhancement
p coin liance wrth.the. '
p he project .,site is located within the upstream
se �" ras the Corona Reach. The River Enhancement Plan creates buffer
42 Petaluma River , ction knowm,
43 zones for'both sides o'f'the,; river, as well as 'for. tributary streams and creeks.
44
The :Restoration Zone includes the riverbank and top of bank areas that require restoration. These
are generally areas `that 'have disturbed vegetation and which, if stabilized and restored, would
,Page 7
I contnliute significantly .to the wildlife and fishery, habitat. values and water quality of the •
2 greenway, Ial the upstream portion of the River, the Plan :requires a 20 foot- Restoration. Zone
Y setback fr,.om top o,f rive -bank. Within this Restoration Zone, trail access is to be generally
4 restri cted except at carefully selected and controlled points for overlooks The pans show one
5 section of the;Riverwalk on Parcel B w,ithin'the,requi'red'.2'0. -f6ot Restoration Zone: This section
6 does riot appear t - consist, of an overlook therefore, �a recommended, condition of SPARC
7 approval . will. require relocation of this. small section of- the'Riverwalk.
8
9 The Buffer: Zone is intended to provide projection to the restored- and' preserved' habitats :along
i3O the river and a transitional setback from the riverbanks- to the adjacent development. area: Public
11 access and amenities are.:al Towed within the,,,zone, but parking and buildings are excluded. The.
1`2 Plan states that "the mimrnum .Buffer Zone is 100 feet from topi of riverbank and 50 -feet from the
13 top of bank of tributary streams and seasonal'wetlands.. However,, while page, 13 of'The.Petaluma
14 Village :Marketplace Planned Community ,D,istnct General. Development 'Plan states that the
15 minimum river setback average shall. be 1'00 feet, it :allows a, 25 -foot ,:setback. from the creeks.
1.6 The General Development Plan also.,allows walkways streets, driveways and drives within this
17 setback: The „p:lans indicate "general compliance with the required .setbacks,, except for the north
18, side of the unnamed creek (sometimes referred 'to as Deer Creek) on the southern edge of the
1.9 development site. 'The setback .from top of bank shown on the plans, to the parking lot scales
20,, between 35 to 45 feet: The, top ,of ,bank for. Capri. Creek', at the. northern edge, - of Parcel B is.
21 unclear on , the plans. This was discussed. with the project engineer, who d'etenm °fined that ,the
22 approximate location of top of bank seems. to be at the 21' elevation. This would make: the
23. setback from top' of bank of Capri Creek; fo the proposed parking to the south approx=imafely 3_5
24 to 40 feet, :rather than the required 5.0 feet. Therefore,. the General Development Plan .and the
setbacks on the, .north , ,side of .Deer Creek and `they south side. of” Capri Creek ,appear to be in
26 conflict with the Buffer Zone as defined in "the River Enhancement Plan. However,,,Pohc "13 on
27 page 74 of :the% River Enhancement Plan :states' "....A buffer zone. setback, if and to -the extent
28 allowed `by law other than .that prescribed in the following programs may be allowed where itht
- y ronmental impacts of the
29 Cat finds , base :on substantial evidence that' the habitat and other ,env -i
30 proposed development can be'miti'gated, and the. intent and :go.als of this P1'an can b.e :met; 'by this: .
31 alternative setback." Therefore,' the Commission and Counci +l could determine that there is
32 substantial: evidence to -allow the reduced_ setbacks as proposed ;in the plans and in the General
3`3 Development Plari.
34
3'5 The bridge; for the VillageDrive entrance will `pass:through' anarrow portion of`an area, identified
36' as " Oak. Grove /Riparian. Woodland "''in ihe,Riwer .Enhancement Plan. -This area is designated �as.a
. 37 Preservation Zone, which prohibits any kind of development other than a "short, low- impact;
38 interpretive trail The River Enhancemen't Plan supplemental guidelines (page 206) 'state; "In,
:39 some areas,. paths and, tr;a`1's or ,o,ther unforeseen future; activities (such. as emergericy flood
40 maintenance, utility. crossings roads or future ;flood control projects) may, intrude into restorat
41 or protection zones i these areas:" Because;.of the, p.ossibilify of these intrusions,, the d'ocunienf.
42 includes guidelines Tor development, including construction, building and` landscaping setbacks
43 and; operating requ r._ernents for mature ,native ,rip arian,;species. The bridge is proposed to cross
4'4 the oak /ri pa 'an woodland 'identi`fied in the River' Enhancemerit� Plan at its narrowest point
45 in order to :minimize impacts. The ,location is, within a: grassy area north,.of the large :oak grove
46; that, appears along the river near the, southern portion of Parcel B, and south of the cluster of oak: -
`'Page 8.
y .d
trees • g er near the boundary of Parcel, B and Parcel A.I of the
1 brill e wou d re �
g q wire the r moval':of one 18 -inch diameter oak tree located west of the river and
3 not part of any identified oak grove:. A road bridge in this general' location is shown in the
4 Petaluma General. Plan 'Circulation Map. A SPARC condition of approval will be included to
5 ensure development of the bridge will comply with the Supplemental Guidelines of the River
6 Enhancement Plan,
7
8 As described in the Draft Supplemental Environinental Impact Report, construction of the
9 project will result in the loss of seasonal wetlands, There are also expected impacts to Capri and
10 Deer Creeks and -the Petaluma 'River during bridge and utility construction, loss of riparian
11 habitat, and, potential degradation. of water quality. Therefore, the - - project will be required to
12 obtain authorizations and permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water
13 Quality, Control.'Board, California Department' of Fish and Game and possibly the U. S. Fish and
14 Wildlife Service.
15
16 Bicycle Plan
17 The Bicycle Circulation Plan „Class :I bike' path's along the' P, etaluma River on the western
18 border of the site and along ;the railroad right =of -way adjacent to" Highway 101 on the eastern
19 border of the site.. As previously stated,Jhe Riverwalk
=extended- through Parcels B and C,
e , as well as e20 which will provide the required bicycl , p access. No bike path is shown on
21 the railroad ri :gh't =of way time'.
22
4 recommended several ;conditions of approval. Because, the condit'i C) reviewed the project and
3 The Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBA
pp ons deal with project design,
25 the rchite
26 approval, with the exception, f the re d for A a bridtural _Review Committee (SPARC)
will be im osed at the t
q ge to cross -Capri Creek since this
27 connection is already included in the project plans.
28
29 Central Petaluma Specific Plan
30 At the D.SEIR public hearings, the, Commission and some of the coinmentors expressed concern
31 regarding the project's compatibility with 'the Central Peta'lurna Specific Plan. The Plan
32 concentrates on the central core of _Petaluma, which 'corislSts of approximately 400 acres bounded
33 by Lakeville Street on the east and morth, :Petaluma Boulevard orr;the west and Highway 101 on
34 the; south. At the outset of the planning process for- Central Petaluma; a list of concepts was
35 developed, to' guide the preparation of the Plan, These concepts included the. consideration of
36 5,000 to 7,000 square foot:national chains for the area, but -not "big box "' retail. Although this ;is
37 appropriate for' the central ;core of the `City, there is .nothing in, the Plan that prohibits
38 development of Target retail opportunities in other parts of the City„ The retail spaces proposed
39 for the Pet aluma Village Marketplace range from 18;400 to 50,000 square feet.. These larger
40 spaces could attract stores selling goods for which- Pefalun ans. currently have to travel outside
41 the City to' purchase. In addition, tliese .stores could attract'. shoppers ffom, other areas who 'could
42 also discover the downtown area.
43
44 Central' Petaluma is the heart .of the City; the General Plan and, the Central Specific Plan
encourage city - centered growth. Completing the development of the subject property, which has
Page 9 .
M
i been designated ,for- coninwi uses And which is within the existing Qljy 'limits and Urban
2 Growth Boundary, does not discount this principle, or promote urban sprawl.
4 Pijffidry Issues:
5 Land User Compatibility
6 The entire 72+ acre site was zoned. Planned Community Development 'in, 199 L., At that time it
7 was anticipated that the entire site would be devel with 'commercial uses: The current
8 proposal is consistent with the, invent of the original proposal.
Lo The 8upplem.enta.) E' IR. determined ned that the ,pr '&t would not result in,lany significant impacts
Pi -
11 with regard to land ifse, including interference with on- going agricultural opqrdtion$ in the
12 vicinity.
13
14 Site itn
15 Parcel A, which includes the Petaluma Village Premium. Outlets; I f ully 0,000
. z _ , ully develop . Wi ., -1 20 1 .
16 square feet of building area. Parcel B is proposed to be developed with 173AQ0+/-;squ'are. feet; Qf
17 building area on 15 out of 22.89- gross acres" Ap natel 81,000 sq uare 'fee
proxii "Y iidre, - t Ofbuilding w ill
18 be constructed; on 9.3. acres out of the 16.3 9.ross acres of Parcel C.
19,
20 The: new develop W e t
qpqrit , ill use corrugat me tal roofs and siding, brick or brick block walls,
21 truss;lyp& gnilage! and meta cornice details similar to that seen on the existing outlet stores. The
22 buildings shall be sited to the; City'si zero net fill require_rnents.
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
.31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3
40
41
42'
43
44
45
The DS'EIR found that the scale and rhassing of the - ,proposed buildings would: be -compatible
with other development, in the vicinity along Highway 101,, which consists - of, horizontal,Iow-
res oJ Oc wi be subject to SPARC , apPfoVaL.
profile �st . w,11h.large.pqrking areas. The pr
The Planning Commission requested installatfon of stor y poles to illustrate the height and 'mass
of the buildings ;proposed forboth Parcel& B And C Although not, yet adopted,, the app licant, was
providqawith a cop I'a m o installed :,on
yofth c,e f �Slory Poles, Poles were lled
I a
Ap as��showri on the map and A&,ex* lained in.,the applicant's letter Attachment,D.-
,pn ' P
In addition to the poles, informational' signs `have been installed which i I ndlud e a site plant and
proposed elevations.
Trafflic/Circ ]a
._..tJ,9n/Parkihg
Access, to the !site w ill be -provided. from, Petaluma .Boulevard North. via the existing Factory
e
Outlet Driv, * 7 1 as Well,as a new to t , south (Village Drfve). Major -roads: in the area. h-at.
would be expected, to carry project traffic are Petaluma Boulevard, Old-. Redwood Highway;
- Stony 'Point 'Road, Corona. Road.. Lakeville Street land Washington Street. Pursuant to they
Planning. Coffiffiis request, the "proposed V illage Dnve° has been marked with: three-foot
tilt, stakes on. both sides of the river ,at,.504Q, tintdvals, out to Petaluma Boulevard. The stakes-
demonstrate the� face-tocutb faco width of the -, proposed road.
Based on . traffic, studies, the DSEIRoconcluded that the additional traffic from the proj ect ' Ott coacould!'
reslult-in several,;impdc thfit would .be potentially �signjVrlczffit. However;, some bf;the potentially
s ignifica'acumuldtive impacts would be. expected to occur even withouf the p "ct -Theimpacts 40
Page LO
I would be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation. of mitigation measures.
2 The mitigation measures would require major ftiersection :and road. improvements as well as
3 adoption of a- policy `b.y the. City Council stating that key ;downtown, intersections: are exempt
4 from LOS thresholds: This issue is discussed in detai'Fin.Chapter 7of the DSEIR.
5
6 The existing Factory Outlet Drive would serve parcels A, and C'; the "proposed Village Drive
7 would serve Parcel B'-. A connection would be provided between "'Parcel A and" Parcel B in the
8 parking lot parallel to U .'S'. 1.01..
9
11 Oaks/Petaluma Factor O.utl road discussed in condition of approval .23 for the River
t o The north/south collector
pro p reviously et Villa e p ro;ect a roved m 1991 ise for the osed as part of the
P
sis 'do;
Factory g J PP
13 that a road linkin
m t and r rt th`e traffic', naly ' project determined
12 ro eet. As revioug Parcels l, : stated; A directly . to Corona Road' would not be needed to
14 accomrriodate traffic ffom theYproposed ;development, because the streets and intersections at the
15 periphery of the project site. have adequate capacity to operate acceptably without the additional
16 roadway.
17
18 The Petaluma Zoning Ordirnance'requires one off- streei parking space for each 300 , square feet of
19 retail floor area and one space, -for each 3 fixed seats within theaters. Because the sales 'floor
20 area of the new retail space is unknown, at this time, the applicantsaconsidered the total building
21 areas. Upon full build -out :of Parcels A, B and C, the applicants have determined that 2,043
22 parking spaces would be:required per the'Zoning Ordinance; the site plan indicates that a total of
3 2,412 spaces would be. provided. Therefore the- project exceeds the City's requirements for off
'0 4 street parking.
25
26 Biological Resources
27 The SEIR analyzed the 'impacts to wildlife, habitat, and. wetlands. Approximately 36 acres of
28 non - native annual grassland .will. be lost with development `of`the si'te's Based on surveys done for
29 the SEIR, the site does not contain, any special . status plant' species. The site does contain
30 potential habitat for five special - status wildlife species:' the northwestern pond turtle, California
31 red- legged frog, California yel_Tow. warbler, northern harrier and whi'te'- tailed kite. Mitigation
32 measures were included to reduce the impacts. to these species to a' less than significant level.
33 Most of the mitigation measures require permit approvals from the California Department of
34 Fish and Game.
35
36 Approximately 1',.47 acres of-wetland communities, including seasonal wetland depressions,
37 emergent marsh and riparian habitat exist :on the site ,(excluding, riparian canopy associated with
38 the Petaluma River). In order to place the proposed theater as far back as possible ! the
,e SEIR determined that
40 the wetlands that would be Most of.seasonal wetlands' h
will .be filled. T
39 Petaluma River, u to .0.46 acres
have limited value as habitat Under, th`e wetlands mitigation
41 program, the. project sponsor will be, required to create replacement wetlands elsewhere.
42 Mitigation replacement` ratios will be determined as part of the U. S. Army Corps!bf Engineers,
4 ,3 Regional Water. Quality Control. Board and /or California 'Department �of Fish and Game
44 permitting process.
page ,I'1.
n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0
14
15'
16
1.7
K
19 .
20
23 .
22
23
24
25
Flooding
Objective (e) of the General Plan Health and _Safety chapter requires that new development not
compound of impact'thc otential for flooding in developed.:areas. Policy 7 under Flood Hazards
states. that the City should allow development;, in flood- prone areas only with appropriate;
mit ga6on. The SM determined that since a portion' of the project site is wi_thi`n the. 100 -year
flood plain of the Petaluma. River; the project` has the potential_to increase '100: -year water surface
elevations! om the river during large flood events; - which .could aggravate existing flooding
problem"s.. Mitigation measures included "strategic site'layout" wherebv . parking ,lots are placed
imrnedi!ately adjacent Ito, the river. This :layout minimizes the obstruction of flow ,in the, river
during, high flow events: It also complies with the .Git.y's zero net fill policy by allowing water to
be stored ,in. the parking lots during major storm.t events so that the, total volume. of flood storage
within the floodplai`n 'is not reduced. This mitigation. measure was expected to reduce the
fumulative. runoff increases are 1 not expect d lto represent ,alts was ignificant, impact on projected
on flooding
conditions in the; Petaluma, River.
Noise
xception the thea, er the Uses on Parcels B and C are, expected to :have s`
With the e � tmilr
.a
operating times to those existing on Parcel A.
There are:. no: ser itiwe noise receptors, such, as hospitals., schools and residences, itnrnediately
adjacent to the project site., The closest sensitive receptors are residences located "north and south
of the site west of Petaluma 'Boulevard. These are :at least, .100 feet or more: from `the roadway
centerline.
0
26 The ISEIR' found that project- rel'ated traffic noise would raise existing, and, future, baseline noise
27 levels by _1 dBA or less along all ;surrounding. and nearby roadways. Since a 3 dBA increase is
28 barely noticeabte to most people, project - related, traff noise was 'consi'dered :a less than
29 significant impact.
30
31 The '•SEIR proposed,171itlgafion medsures to limit noise during costruction,activities and:• to avoid
32 future land ,use compatibility probl'ems'.
33 1
34, ; Cul tural R esources
35 No evidence of archaeological material was found on the _project ;site., However, to ensure the
36 : protection of'any buried archaeological materials, a condition, of approval will be recommended
37 to require. that if any such. materials .are found during coristructioin work, all work be stopped'
38 until,a q,ua�lified;archaeologist.s consulted.
39
40 PURL @C COMMENTS
4,1 .
42 A Notice 'of Public 'Hearing was publ'i'shed in the Argus Courier and no were sent to
43 residents and, property owners within 5 0 feet of ythe project site as well as to people outside the
44 500 =foot noticearea who requested�notificatioil and /or who previously commented on the DSEIR .
45 or, the project. A11 letters "received pnor to the public hearing in response to the project review
46 public notice have been- :included as Attachment F,or will be distributed to the Commission,
'Page 12
2 At the time of the writing :of „this staff report, 123 comments were, received in response to the
3 Notice of Avai'labilit'y for the SEIR.. Of these letters, 83; clearly in opposition to the project
P p
4 and 26 favored the' ro osal: °The:remander of',the responses focused' only on the DSEIR.
5
6 I ENV IRONMENTAL 1VEVIEW
' 7
8 Section 15.162 of the CEQA guidelines requires the preparation of a Subsequent ELR when
9
information was not known .and' could not have been ; known at the time the previous EIR was
to certified as complete. In addition to the CEQA requirement,• Condition of.`app.rovalN'o. 51 for the
11 original PCD Master Plan Program for the River Oaks /Petaluma Factory Outlet Village required
review for:Parcels; B and C prior to project review.
12 the appropriate environrnentai', .
13 .
14 A Draft Subsequent 'Environmental, Impact Report was prepared by Lamphier- Gregory; the
15 required 45 -day comment period began on December 18 2002 and ended on February 3, 2003.
16
17 Although the EIR could be,,,certified as adequate and the project, denied, the , project cannot be
18 approved unless the EIR is. certified as adequate.
19
20
2.1 ATTACHMENTS ,
402 3 Attachment A: Recommended Conditions of Approval
24 Attachment B: City '
' y Counci I Resolution 91 -.1,36 a pp roving ahe PCD Master Plan Program for
25 the River Oaks%Petaluma Factory Outlet;Village Project.
26 Attachment C: Petalurrma Village 1Vlarketp'lace - Planned, Community District General
27 Development Plan
28 Attachment D! Applicant's letter'and Story Pole Plan
29 Attachment E: Reduced`Plans
30 Attachment F: Correspondence Received
31 Attachment G: SPARC' Minutes- from. preliminary on August 22, 2202
32 Attachment H: Full Size.Plans (Ptanning Commissioners only,)
33
34
35
36 S:\PC- Planning Commission \Reports \pvm }pcprojeci staff,rpt4- 22'03:doc.
Page 13,