HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Resolution 2022-11 08/09/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
RESOLUTION 2022-11
CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT, MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT TO ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPT A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE SCOTT RANCH PROJECT, PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, in 2004 Davidon Homes submitted an application to the City of Petaluma for a 93-lot
residential project located on two parcels (APN 019-120-040 and -041) and consisting of 58.66 acres at
the corner of D Street and Windsor Drive and adjacent to the Helen Putnam Regional Park ("Prior Project");
and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2004, a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report was
prepared and circulated to all responsible and affected agencies for consultation on the scope of an
Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") to be prepared for the project pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21080.4 and California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines Section 15082; and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2004, the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Report was also
posted at the Sonoma County Clerk's Office in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.3;
and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 2004, and August 25, 2004 scoping meetings were held to solicit public
comment regarding the environmental analysis to be undertaken and the City initiated work on the Draft
EIR (SCH No 2004072137) in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15000 et seq; and
WHEREAS, work on the EIR was temporarily halted in 2008 during the recession, due in part to the
environmental consultant going out of business, and during this period several large City-wide planning
processes were underway including preparation of the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 (completed
in 2008); and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2013, the City released a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("2013
DEIR") for a 60 day public comment period through April 15, 2013, during which time staff received
approximately 300 comment letters as well as, both oral and written comments during a Planning
Commission hearing on March 12, 2013 and a City Council hearing on April 15, 2013; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2013, the Planning Commission deferred recommendation on the
environmental document until review of the Final EIR and requested clarification of certain topics
analyzed in the 2013 DEIR, and on April 15, 2013, after deliberation and discussion the City Council
directed staff to proceed with preparation of a FEIR and to provide additional information and
clarification addressing comments on the 2013 DEIR and further analysis on the reduced project
alternative; and
WHEREAS, in response to comments received on the 2013 DEIR, the applicant elected to submit a
revised project with a reduced development proposal including 66-single family residential lots and
including private and public open space, a public park with multi-use trail, a Class I trail along D Street,
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 1
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
trailhead parking lots, and other infrastructure such as sidewalks, a roundabout, and sewer, water, and
storm drainage infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City initiated a revised DEIR ("2017 RDEIR") and on March 2, 2017, released the 2017
RDEIR for a 60 day public comment period through May 1, 2017, during which time staff received
approximately 157 comment letters, as well as oral comments during a Planning Commission hearing on
April 4, 2017, and a City Council hearing on June 19, 2017; and
WHEREAS, at the April 4, 2017 hearing, the Planning Commission, by motion, recommended that
the City Council authorize preparation of a Final EIR including an analysis of an alternative that excluded
development south of Kelly Creek, and requested that the Final EIR return to the Planning Commission for
consideration and recommendation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at the June 19, 2017 hearing, the City Council determined that the 2017 RDEIR was
inadequate and that additional analysis was needed prior to preparation of a Final EIR, and the Council,
by motion, directed staff to revise the 2017 RDEIR to address concerns raised by the Planning Commission
and City Council including a more robust evaluation of the 28-lot "Environmentally Preferred" alternative
that was included in the 2017 RDEIR; and
WHEREAS, in June 2018, the Kelly Creek Protection Project (KCPP) of Earth Island Institute
announced that it had entered into an agreement with Davidon Homes in response to comments
received on the 2017 RDEIR,and Davidon Homes and KCPP ("Applicants") submitted a revised application
to the City of Petaluma for a 28-lot residential project on approximately 15 acres, along with dedicating
approximately 44 acres of the project site to Sonoma County Regional Parks as an extension to the Helen
Putnam Regional Park; and
WHEREAS, current entitlement requests submitted by the Applicants include (1) a General Plan
Amendment to modify and clarify General Plan Policy 2-P-68, (2) Amendment of General Plan Figure 5-2,
(3) a rezoning from Residential 1 (R1) to a Planned Unit District (PUD), (4) adoption of Planned Unit
Development Plan and Guidelines; and (5) a Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) to subdivide the project
parcels into residential, open space, public access, and parking lots; and
WHEREAS, subsequent review will enable the development of the Scott Ranch project including
Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR) required for development of the single-family homes,
associated landscaping, and lighting in the residential component, and for public improvements
proposed as part of the Putnam Park Extension Project component, as well as an administrative Tentative
Parcel Map' to divide Parcel B as shown in the VTM for dedication to the Sonoma County Regional Parks,
and for designation of a historic landmark to designate the barn complex as a local historic resource;
and
WHEREAS, the City prepared and distributed copies of the RDEIR on the updated application, in
conformance with CEQA,specifically CEQA Guidelines Section 15086, to those public agencies that have
jurisdiction by law with respect to the project and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought
the comments of such persons and agencies; and
WHEREAS,the Notice of Availability for the RDEIR was published in the Argus Courier on December
31, 2020, mailed to residents and occupants within 1,000 feet of the site, and a Notice of Completion was
filed with the Sonoma County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse (exceeding CEQA's notice
requirements) and in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15085; and
1 As the tentative parcel map proposes to create two parcels,its approval would be conducted administratively,anticipated to occur
following approval of the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
WHEREAS, the RDEIR was circulated for more than the required 45-day public review period,
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087, from December 31, 2020 to March 8, 2021 and the City
continued to accept public comments through the City Council hearing on March 15, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on January 19, 2021, pursuant to City Resolution No. 2018-107 N.C.S., onsite signage was
posted informing residents of the RDEIR availability and the Planning Commission and City Council
hearings on the RDEIR; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 9, 2021 to consider the
RDEIR, the purpose of the hearing being to inform the public about the contents of the RDEIR and to
receive oral comments about the adequacy and accuracy of the RDEIR; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on March 15, 2021 to consider the RDEIR, the
purpose of the hearings being to inform the public about the contents of the RDEIR and to receive oral
comments about the adequacy and accuracy of the RDEIR; and
WHEREAS, as a result of these hearings, the Planning Commission recommended and City Council
directed that a Final EIR be prepared addressing comments and concerns raised during public comment
on RDEIR; and
WHEREAS, written and oral comments on the RDEIR have been received and responses to those
comments have been prepared in the form of a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR"); and,
WHEREAS, in response to significant environmental conclusions reached in the Draft EIR and in
response to public comments on the Draft EIR, including concerns raised during the public hearings on
the RDEIR by City Planning Commissioners and City Council members, the Applicants submitted a revised
concept site plan for evaluation in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project proposes a 28-lot single-family residential subdivision and
approximately 47 acres of open space/parkland, including multi-use trails north and south of Kelly creek
connecting the existing barn complex on the east of the site to the existing Helen Putnam Regional Park
to the west. A roundabout on City right-of-way at the intersection of D Street and Windsor Drive is
proposed as part of the residential project component.Also, as part of the project, an approximately 800-
foot offsite sidewalk gap closure on the east side of D Street between Windsor Drive and Sunnyslope
Avenue would be provided,as well as modifications and revisions to the original Project (now the "Revised
Project") to reduce certain significant impacts that would have otherwise occurred pursuant to the
original project including impacts to California Red Legged Frog habitat; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project continues to provide for a planned future offsite trail segment
connecting the Scott Ranch property with the existing trail within Helen Putnam Regional Park; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project boundaries remain unchanged and refinements to the project are
limited to reducing the building development footprint by further clustering lots, reducing setbacks, and
building sizes; and
WHEREAS, the environmental effects of the Revised Project have been analyzed and compared
to the environmental effects presented in the RDEIR, and that analysis has been included in the Final EIR,
concluding that:
a) no new significant environmental impacts not previously identified in the RDEIR would result from
the Revised Project, and
b) no substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact has been
identified as resulting from the Revised Project, and no additional mitigation measures are
necessary to reduce such impacts to a level of insignificance, and
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
c) there is no feasible alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously
analyzed in the RDEIR that would clearly lessen significant environmental impacts of the Revised
Project and that the Project applicant declines to adopt; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2022, pursuant to Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) 24.100.13, onsite
signage was posted informing residents of the availability of the Final EIR and the Planning Commission
and City Council hearings on the Final EIR and requested entitlements; and
WHEREAS, the Notice of Availability for the Final EIR was published in the Argus Courier on June 10,
2022, mailed to residents and occupants within 1,000 feet of the site, filed with the Sonoma County Clerk
and State Clearinghouse (exceeding CEQA's notice requirements), published on the City's website,
posted to the State's CEQAnet portal, and made available for public review at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR was circulated for more than the required 10-day public review period
beginning on June 10, 2022 and extending through City Council consideration, tentatively scheduled for
October 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City distributed copies of the Final EIR in conformance with CEQA to those public
agencies that have jurisdiction by law with respect to the project and to other interested persons and
agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and
WHEREAS, on February 4, 2021 the Applicants held a neighborhood meeting to create dialogue
with community members, provide information and updates on the Project, and address concerns; and
WHEREAS,on October 6, 2021,the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBAC) considered
and provided feedback on the pedestrian and bicycle facilities proposed by the project including
sidewalks and pedestrian crossings, bicycle rack location, access and connectivity to Helen Putnam
Regional Park, trail alignments and features, and the proposed amendment to General Plan Figure 5-2,
Bicycle Facilities, and;
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2021, the Recreation Music and Park Commission (RMPC) considered
and provided feedback on the Helen Putnam Regional Park expansion, Barn Center improvements,
playground, amphitheater, picnic areas, multi-use trails, and other amenities proposed as part of the
Putnam Park Extension component of the project, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting on July 12, 2022, at which
time it considered the Final EIR and accepted public testimony; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081 (a) of the Public Resources Code requires the City Council to make one
or more findings with respect to each significant adverse environmental effect of the project and to
evaluate alternatives to the Project; and
WHEREAS, the EIR identified several potentially significant impacts that will be reduced to a less
than significant level with specified mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the Revised Project will
require adoption of Findings on Impacts and Mitigations as set forth in attached Exhibit 1; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081 (a)(3) of the Public Resources Code requires the City Council to make
one or more findings with respect to alternatives studies in the EIR if all significant effects of the Plan are
not mitigated to insignificance; and
WHEREAS, general findings and findings regarding each significant adverse environmental effect
of the Project are set forth in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, after all identification and inclusion of all feasible mitigation, certain impacts due to
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) will remain significant and unavoidable, even after the application of
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 4
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
feasible mitigation measures to lessen those impacts, and as of the date of this action cannot be
conclusively described as less than significant because of regulatory and technological uncertainty; and
WHEREAS, Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) requires that the City Council find that specific
economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations outweigh any significant environmental
effects of the Project which cannot be fully mitigated; and
WHEREAS, a Statement of Overriding Considerations consisting of the City's findings and
determination regarding the Project's benefits as comported to its significant and unavoidable effects is
contained in Exhibit 1, Section 7, which is incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project does not have the potential to have a significant adverse impact
on wildlife resources as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either individually or cumulatively,
though it is not exempt from Fish and Game filing fees; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List
compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the EIR identified several potentially significant impacts that will be reduced to a less
than significant level with specified mitigation measures, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15091 (d), a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared and set forth in Exhibit 2 to
ensure that all mitigation measures which serve to reduce environmental impacts of the Project are fully
implemented; and
WHEREAS, on August 9, 2022, the Final EIR was presented to the Planning Commission of the City
of Petaluma and the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information presented in the
Final EIR prior to making recommendations to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of
proceedings for the Project is the City of Petaluma Planning Division, Petaluma City Hall, 1 1 English Street,
Petaluma, CA 94952; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that the above recitals are true and
correct and incorporated by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission makes the following recommendations to
the City Council:
1. Certify that the Scott Ranch Final EIR (SCH# 2004072137) contains all the requirements of CEQA
Guidelines Section 15132, inclusive of the RDEIR, references, appendices, and all attachments
thereto, have been completed in compliance with CEQA;
2. As required by CEQA and based on substantial evidence in the record, adopt the Findings
regarding potentially significant effects of the Revised Project Exhibit 1, and statement of
overriding considerations, Section 7 to Exhibit 1, which are incorporated herein by reference.
3. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in the attached Exhibit 2, which
is incorporated herein by reference, to ensure that all mitigation measures relied on in the Findings
are fully implemented. Compliance with the MMRP set forth therein shall be a condition of any
subsequent Project approval.
4. Find that for each identified mitigation measure that requires the cooperation or action of another
agency,adoption and implementation of each such mitigation measure is within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of the public agency identified, and the measures can and should be adopted
and/or implemented by said agency.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 5
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
ADOPTED this 9th day of August 2022, by the following vote:
Commission Member Aye No Absent Abstain
Councilmember McDonnell X
Chair Bauer X
Vice Chair Hooper X
Mc Erlane X
Potter X
Racusen X
Whisman X
DocuSigned by:
BA70860FFFBE4ID...
Heidi Bauer, Chair
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
EDocuSigned by:
���'� � , M ,]�/D locnu1S,�igned by:
E468369CSEDF404... �'/ l�`^"''�" a(�v�� U.SS�S�OU�I.� �l�j U.116r vwv�
2588C556ED25412... I 1
Andrew Trippel, Planning Manager Dylan Brady, Assistant City Attorney
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 6
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
EXHIBIT 1
CEQA FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES AND STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statutory Requirements for Findings
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council
hereby makes the following Findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts of
the Scott Ranch Project as Revised (File No. PLPJ-2022-0002, formerly #03-TSM-0396-CR) ("Project") and
means for mitigating those impacts. For the purpose of these Findings, the term Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) means the Draft, Revised Draft, and Final EIR documents collectively, unless otherwise
specified.
These Findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environment impact contained in the
EIR. Instead, the Findings provide a summary description of each impact, identify the applicable
mitigation measures set forth in the EIR and adopted by the City, and state Findings on the significance
of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these
environmental findings and conclusions is in the EIR, and these Findings hereby incorporate by reference
the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the EIR's determinations regarding mitigation
measures and the Project's impacts and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. The
facts supporting these Findings are found in the record as a whole for the Project.
For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the public agency is
required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the
project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines states
that:
"If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or
statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered `acceptable."'
In making these Findings, the City ratifies, adopts and incorporates into these Findings the analysis and
explanation in the EIR, and ratifies, adopts and incorporates into these Findings the determination and
conclusions of the EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent
that any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these Findings.
Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following Findings are summarized rather then set
forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final EIRs should be consulted for a complete description of the
impacts and mitigations.
1.2 Organization/Format of Findings
Section 2 of these Findings contains a summary description of the Project, sets forth the objectives of the
Project and provides related background information. Section 3 identifies the Project's potential
environmental effects that were determined to have no impact or be less than significant, and do not
require mitigation. Section 4 identifies the potentially significant effects of the Project that were
determined to be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. All numbered references identifying specific
mitigation measures refer to numbered mitigation measures found in the Final EIR. Section 5 identifies the
significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level even though all feasible
mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the Project. Section 6 discusses the
feasibility of Project alternatives. Section 7 includes the City's Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Section 8 includes a list of General Findings made and adopted by the City. These Findings summarize
and incorporate by reference, the impacts and mitigation measures from the Draft EIR, Revisions to the
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 7
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Draft EIR, and the Responses to Comments. Full descriptions of the impacts and analyses are contained
in the EIR.
SECTION 2: SCOTT RANCH PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Location
The approximately 58.66-acre project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City at the corner
of the intersection of Windsor Drive and D Street. It is accessible by US 101 Highway (US 101),approximately
two miles to the east, and Highway 116 to the north. The main arterial street that provides access to the
project site is D Street. Direct access to the site is provided by Windsor Drive and D Street. The site is
currently an undeveloped property with a barn complex (consisting of three barns and an old dairy
equipment cleaning shed), and an unoccupied mobile home, and remnants of a collapsed farm house
that was destroyed by fire.
There are existing single-family homes developed to the north, northwest (Victoria Subdivision), and east
(Pinnacle Heights Subdivision) of the project site. Helen Putnam Regional Park, maintained by the Sonoma
County Regional Parks, is located to the west of the project site. Agricultural uses or rural residences on
large parcels in private ownership are located to the south and southwest in unincorporated Sonoma
County.
2.2 Project Objectives
The City of Petaluma has developed the following primary objectives for the proposed Project to satisfy
CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b).
The City's objectives are to:
• provide development consistent with the City's long-term development goals, especially as
related to the provision of additional housing;
• develop the project site in a manner that preserves the uniqueness and gateway value of the site;
• implement General Plan policies related to establishment of an Urban Separator and the
Petaluma ring trail system; and
• provide improved recreational access to the Helen Putnam Regional Park.
The project applicants' key objectives for the proposed Project are to:
• promote and maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary thereby
discouraging urban sprawl;
• develop a high-quality residential project on the west side of Petaluma, compatible with existing
residential subdivisions in the neighborhood and with rural and park areas to the south and west
of the site;
• permanently preserve sensitive biological and geological areas of the site as protected open
space;
• preserve and enhance Kelly Creek in its natural state;
• preserve the barn complex;
• provide a public pedestrian/bicycle trail connecting to Helen Putnam Regional Park; and
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 8
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• provide a large extension of the Helen Putnam Regional Park, incorporating new trails, a restored
barn complex, habitat and waterway enhancements, and related features.
2.3 Project Description
The proposed Scott Ranch Project consists of two components: the Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project
proposed by Davidon Homes and the Putnam Park Extension Project proposed by the Kelly Creek
Protection Project (KCPP) of Earth Island Institute. The residential project component would develop
approximately 1 1.2 acres of the site with 28 single-family residences, streets, and ancillary improvements,
including approximately 5 acres of private open space.The single-family residences would be developed
along two new proposed streets-one new street would branch north of Windsor Drive and a second new
street would branch south of Windsor Drive.The homes would be arranged in clusters off each of the two
proposed streets. Other infrastructure improvements (i.e., sewer, water, and storm drainage facilities,
including detention basins) needed to serve the proposed Project would also be constructed. A
roundabout on City right-of-way at the intersection of D Street and Windsor Drive would be developed
as part of the residential project component. A six-foot wide sidewalk would be provided on the south
side of Windsor Drive from the new intersection to D Street, in addition to an off-site sidewalk between
Windsor Drive and Sunnyslope Avenue running along the east side of D Street.
The proposed Putnam Park Extension Project component would extend the existing Helen Putnam
Regional Park eastward to D Street by developing a park area on the balance of the project site,
approximately 47-acres. The proposed Project would develop a barn center that would include the
renovation of the existing barn complex and the cleaning shed, pathways between the structures, bike
parking, information kiosks, vegetable gardens, demonstration and working corrals, antique farm
equipment with a hand pump, and an amphitheater for outdoor learning activities. Access to the barn
center is currently provided via D Street by a driveway,would be improved and used as a service vehicle
entrance with removable bollards. The barn center would be visible from D Street and accessible from
the main parking lot (or lower parking lot). The proposed Project would include a multi-use trail of
approximately 0.7 mile that would run along the north and south side of Kelly Creek. A 0.35-mile section
of the loop trail along the north side of Kelly Creek (north trail) would connect Helen Putnam Regional
Park on the west end of the project site to the barn center on the east end of the project site. Access to
this trail section would be from the upper parking lot through a four-foot-wide, 0.02-mile-long, ADA-
compliant trail. A 300-foot Urban Separator would be maintained between the proposed development
and the southern boundary of the project site. See Section 2.0, Project Description, in the FEIR for further
information about the project characteristics.
The project Applicants have requested the following approvals for the proposed Project: (1) a General
Plan Amendment to modify and clarify General Plan Policy 2-P-68; (2) an Amendment of General Plan
Figure 5-2, Bicycle Facilities; (3) a zoning map amendment to rezone the property from Residential 1 (R1)
to a Planned Unit District (PUD); (4) a zoning text amendment to adopt the Scott Ranch Planned Unit
Development Plan and Guidelines; and (5) a Vesting Tentative Map to subdivide the project parcels into
residential, open space, public access and parking lots. Subsequent entitlements anticipated for the
Project include Site Plan and Architectural Review for both the residential component and the Phase 1
park improvements, Local Landmark Designation for the red barn complex, Historic Site Plan and
Architectural Review for the renovation of the barn complex, and a Tentative Parcel Map for purpose of
transferring Parcel B to Kelly Creek Protection Project prior to the final map.
Regional Park Trail
The Helen Putnam Regional Park Trail project (RPT) is an approximately 0.5-mile-long trail segment
proposed by Sonoma County Regional Parks (SCRP) in collaboration with the project Applicants on
parkland offsite to the west of the Scott Ranch project site. Although not being proposed jointly with the
Project, the RPT is considered a related project because it would provide a connection from proposed
trails onsite north and south of Kelly Creek to existing offsite trails in Helen Putnam Regional Park.
Construction of the proposed multi-use trail on the project site would create conditions that could lead
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 9
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
to the construction of the RPT on the Helen Putnam Regional Park property. While there is no guarantee
that the RPT would be constructed, with the access provided by the project site multi-use trail between
D Street and the eastern boundary of the regional park, the probability that the RPT would be constructed
would increase.Therefore conservatively, the RDEIR analyzed the RPT as a related project and presented
the environmental consequences that could result from its construction and operation. The Final EIR may
be used by the SCRP if and when it decides to construct the RPT.
2.4 Alternatives
As noted in the RDEIR Section 1.2, Project History, the proposed project has been revised since its original
application submittal in 2004 and the environmental review has considered prior iterations of the project
including a 93 lot single family residential subdivision (2013 DEIR), a 66 lot single family residential
subdivision (2017 RDEIR), and the most recent 2020 RDEIR which analyzed a 28 lot single family subdivision
on 15 acres and a 44 acre park and open space on the balance of the site. Each of the prior DEIRs (2013
and 2017) included an analysis of project alternatives.
Based on the Project objectives and anticipated environmental consequences, and pursuant to Section
15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the following Project alternatives were selected for analysis in the most
recent 2020 RDEIR:
• The No Project/No Development alternative assumes the continuation of existing conditions within
the Project site.
• The Davidon (28 Lot) Residential Project alternative would develop 28 single-family homes in the
same lot configuration as the proposed Project. This alternative would not include the Putnam
Park Extension Project component. Under this alternative, the multi-use trails and pedestrian and
livestock bridges would not be developed, the barn complex would remain in place and would
not be restored, and there would be no pasture improvements or stock pond enhancements.
• The Putnam Park Extension Project would only include the features of the Putnam Park Extension
Project component and no residential homes would be developed.
A more detailed description of these alternatives, and required findings, are set forth in Section 6:
Feasibility of Project Alternatives.
SECTION 3: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT OR TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as discussed below, the following
environmental factors associated with the Project would have No Impact or a Less Than Significant
Impact and no mitigation would be required.
3.1 Aesthetics
• Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway.
• Implementation of the proposed project would not create new sources of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
• The implementation of the proposed RPT project would not result in a significant impact on scenic
vistas, scenic resources, visual character and quality, or light and glare.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 10
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in a significant cumulative
impact with regard to scenic vistas, visual character, or scenic resources.
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the regional park trail project, in conjunction with other
past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in significant
cumulative impact with regard to light and glare.
3.2 Air Quality
• The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan.
• The proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of people.
• The proposed project and the proposed RPT, in conjunction with other past, present and
reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in significant cumulative air quality
impacts.
3.3 Biological Resources
• The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation
plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan.
• Implementation of the proposed RPT project would not interfere with wildlife movement.
3.4 Cultural Resources
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the regional park trail project, in conjunction with other
past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in significant
cumulative cultural resource impacts.
3.5 Energy
• Construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation.
• The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency.
• Construction and operation of the proposed RPT project would minimally increase the
consumption of energy but would not result in significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy or exceed the capacity of distribution systems.
3.6 Geology and Soils
• The proposed project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in significant cumulative
geology and soils impacts.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 11
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• The proposed project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that would have a significant impact on the environment.
• Operation of the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• The proposed RPT project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment, nor would the proposed RPT
conflict with any applicable plans or policies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• The proposed project and the RPT project would not result in a significant cumulative greenhouse
gas impact.
3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
• The proposed project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that it would impede groundwater management.
• The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area
in a manner that would create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff.
• The proposed project would not risk the release of pollutants in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones that would risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.
• The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area
in a manner that would conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan.
• The implementation of the proposed RPT project would not have a significant impact related to
water quality, hydromodification, erosion, flooding, and other hazards.
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in a significant cumulative
impact related to hydrology and water quality.
3.9 Land Use and Planning
• The proposed project would not physically divide an established community.
• The proposed project could not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
a land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
• The proposed project would not result in development of land uses that are substantially
incompatible with existing adjacent land uses or with planned uses.
• The implementation of the proposed RPT project would not physically divide an established
community, conflict with applicable land use or habitat conservation plans, or be incompatible
with surrounding land uses.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 12
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in significant cumulative
impacts related to land use and planning.
3.10 Noise
• Noise generated by project operation would not result in generation of a substantial permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
• Construction and operation of the proposed RPT project would not increase noise levels at existing
residential uses in the vicinity nor expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration. The
proposed RPT would not expose persons on-site to excessive noise levels nor generate traffic which
would substantially increase noise levels.
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present
and reasonably foreseeable future development,would not result in a significant cumulative noise
impact.
3.11 Population and Housing
• The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in the area either directly
or indirectly.
• The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people.
• The proposed RPT project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth or displace
a substantial number of existing housing or people.
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the proposed RPT project,in conjunction with other closely
related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in a
significant cumulative impact with regards to population and housing.
3.12 Public Services, including Recreation
• The proposed project would not require the construction of new or physically altered fire facilities.
• The proposed project would not require the construction of new or physically altered police
facilities.
• The proposed project would not require the construction of new or physically altered school
facilities.
• The proposed project would not require the construction of new or physically altered library
facilities.
• Development of the proposed project would increase the use of existing neighborhood parks or
other recreational facilities but not result in substantial physical deterioration of the facilities. In
addition, the demand created by the proposed project would not require the construction of
new or physically altered parks and recreation facilities.
• The implementation of the proposed RPT would not cause a substantial adverse impact related
to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other governmental services.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 13
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• The proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other closely related
past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development, would not result in a significant
cumulative impact on public services.
3.13 Transportation
• Development of the proposed project would not impact access to transit facilities.
• Development of the proposed project would not impact pedestrian and bicycle facilities or
create hazardous conditions for pedestrians or bicyclists that currently do not exist.
• Implementation of the proposed RPT project would not conflict with any applicable plans,
ordinances or policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the traffic
circulation system; increase traffic hazards; or result in inadequate emergency access.
• Development of the proposed project and the RPT project would not result in cumulative impacts
related to the internal circulation system,substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature, nor substantially impact emergency access.
• Cumulative development, including the proposed project and the RPT project, would not result in
cumulative impacts to public transit facilities.
• Cumulative development, including the proposed project and the RPT project,would not result in
cumulative impacts to pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
• The proposed project and the RPT project would not cause temporary disruption to the
transportation network due to construction under Cumulative conditions.
3.14 Utilities and Service Systems
• Development of the proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water supply entitlements and would not require expansion of the water delivery
system.
• Development of the proposed project would not require the relocation or construction of new or
expanded wastewater treatment facilities.
• The proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste and would not generate solid waste that would require the
expansion of the permitted capacity of a regional landfill in excess of state or local standards or
in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste
reduction goals.
• Development of the proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
• Implementation of the proposed RPT project would not cause substantial adverse impacts
requiring the construction or relocation of new or expanded water supply or expansion of a water
delivery system; result in the construction or relocation of new wastewater treatment facilities or
conveyance systems; or require relocation or construction or expansion of new or expanded
stormwater drainage facilities.The proposed RPT project would comply with all regulations related
to solid waste and there would be sufficient landfill capacity to serve the proposed RPT project
would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 14
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• The proposed project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably
foreseeable future development, would not result in a significant cumulative impact on utilities.
3.15 Wildfire
• The proposed project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan.
• The proposed project would not substantially exacerbate wildfire risks, or expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
• The proposed project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as road, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts on the
environment.
• Implementation of the proposed RPT project would not substantially exacerbate wildfire risks or
result in adverse impact related to an emergency response plan, or expose people or structures
to significant risks.
• The proposed Scott Ranch Project and the RPT project, in conjunction with other closely related
past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development would not result in a significant
cumulative impact on wildfire.
SECTION 4: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
The Draft Revised EIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from implementation
of the Project. However, based upon substantial evidence in the record the City finds that for each of the
significant or potentially significant impacts identified in this section, that mitigations have been required
or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in
the Final EIR. Thus, adoption of these mitigation measures set forth below will reduce these significant or
potentially significant effects to less-than-significant levels. Adoption of the recommended mitigation
measures will effectively make the mitigation measures part of the Project. The following summarizes the
rationale to support these findings, as presented in detail, including the data and analysis, in the Final EIR:
4.1 Aesthetics
Impact AES-1: Development of the project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-la and AES-lb would reduce proposed project
effects on a scenic vista to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
AES-la: The following restrictions shall be placed on the design of the proposed project:
Elements such as design, height, contouring, and massing of proposed single-family
development shall comply with Hillside Protection and Tree Protection ordinances. Homes shall
be designed to step with the hillside and avoid solid walls or overhangs that run against the
natural slope of the site.
Construction of Lots 1 through 10 shall be carefully evaluated during the Site Plan and
Architectural Review process.These lots shall only be subdivided or developed with structures
that would incorporate appropriate hillside design elements and would not substantially block
or obscure views.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 15
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
The design, height, and massing of retaining walls shall be specifically reviewed during the Site
Plan and Architectural Review process. Retaining walls shall not exceed 5 feet in height unless
incorporating terracing with landscaping and minimum width of 3 feet. Retaining walls should
conform to the slope. Treatment of retaining walls that are visible from a public street shall
incorporate a veneer of natural stone, stained concrete, earth toned textured surface, or as
otherwise accepted through the Site Plan and Architectural Review process such that walls
blend in with the natural hillside environment and promote a rural character.
Review during the Site Plan and Architectural Review shall include project landscape.
Vegetation including woodland cover shall be reestablished on graded slopes and between
existing abutting residential structures (See also Mitigation Measure 131O-2a). Reestablishment
of vegetation near the project's residences shall conform to the requirement of the project's
Fuel Management Program.
AES-1 b: The architectural elevations and materials used on the exterior of the residences (including
roofing materials, exterior finishing, and trim palette) shall include natural, terrain-neutral colors
and prohibit the use of brightly colored terra cotta or red clay roof tiles in order to limit potential
visual contrast between the proposed development and the adjacent hillsides,as determined
acceptable by the Planning Commission through the Site Plan and Architectural Review
process required by Petaluma Municipal Code Section 24.010. The developer shall include
Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R) that prohibit or limit roofing color changes by
future owners, in accordance with the Planning Commission Site Plan and Architectural
Review approval.
Finding for Impact AES-1: Mitigation Measures AES-1 a and AES-1 b would reduce proposed project effects
on a scenic vista to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Measures AES-1 a and AES-1 b will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact AES-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Mitigation requires the site plan and architectural and review (SPAR), which will
occur pursuant to Chapter 24 of the IZO prior to the issuance of any building permits to consider the
precise massing and architectural design against required setbacks, height limitations, site coverage and
other development standards. These standards, as reviewed pursuant to the SPAR process, will ensure
that the proposed development is attractive and consistent with existing development in the vicinity.
During SPAR review, specific tree preservation and replanting requirements shall also be monitored for
compliance.Therefore, after applying these measures, the impact would be less than significant.
Impact AES-3: Development of the project site could substantially degrade the visual character and
quality of public views of the site and its surroundings.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-3a and AES-3b would reduce proposed Project
effects on the visual character and quality of public views of the site and its surroundings to less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
AES-3a: All construction staging shall occur within the project boundaries and on authorized road
encroachment. Construction staging areas shall use appropriate screening (i.e., temporary
fencing with opaque material) to screen views of construction equipment and material.
AES-3b: Project landscaping and recreational features shall be designed and located in a manner to
preserve the visual character of the project site and promote the view of the barn complex.
As part of the SPAR, the Applicants shall submit to the City of Petaluma detailed landscape
plans showing the location of the new trees and visual simulations demonstrating the
preservation of the existing scenic view of the barn complex.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 16
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Findinq for Impact AES-3: Mitigation Measures AES-3a and AES-3b would reduce proposed project effects
on a scenic vista to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Measures AES-3a and AES-3b will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact AES-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Mitigation requires that construction staging occur within the project boundaries
and on an authorized road encroachment, and be required to use appropriate screening (i.e.,temporary
fencing with opaque material) to screen views of construction equipment and material.
Mitigation requires project landscaping and recreational features be designed and located in a manner
to preserve the visual character of the project site and promote the view of the barn complex. As part of
the SPAR, the Applicants shall submit to the City of Petaluma detailed landscape plans showing the
location of the new trees and visual simulations demonstrating the preservation of the existing scenic view
of the barn complex.Therefore, after applying these measures, the impact would be less than significant.
4.2 Air Quality
Impact AIR-2: Construction and operation of the proposed project would generate emissions that would
result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any critical pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
Impact AIR-3: Construction and operation of the proposed project would expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce project construction impacts to less
than significant.
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure AIR-2
The construction contractor(s) shall implement the following measures during construction:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power
vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the
maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure
Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided
for construction workers at all access points.
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 17
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency
regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.
The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
Findinq for Impact AIR-2 and AIR-3:Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce proposed Project fugitive dust
and construction emissions to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure AIR-2 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce
Impact AIR-2 and AIR-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measures will reduce fugitive dust emissions from
grading as recommended by Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Exhaust emissions
from construction equipment and trucks for criteria pollutants would be below BAAQMD criteria pollutant
thresholds as described in the RDEIR, and would be further minimized through implementation of
measures during construction activities. Therefore, after applying these measures, the impact would be
less than significant.
RPT Impact AIR-1: The construction of the proposed RPT project would not result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable national or state ambient air quality standard,expose existing sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations, create objectionable odors, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan, but construction-phase emissions of fugitive dust could exceed applicable
thresholds.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure RPT AIR-1 would reduce RPT project construction
impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure RPT AIR-1
The construction contractor(s) shall implement the following measures during construction:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads)
shall be watered two times per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power
vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the
maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure
Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]).
f. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
g. A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the
Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action
within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with
applicable regulations.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 18
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Findinq for Impact RPT AIR-1: Mitigation Measure RPT AIR-1 would reduce proposed Project fugitive dust
and construction emissions to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure RPT AIR-1 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact RPT AIR-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Implementation of the mitigation measure will reduce fugitive dust emissions from
grading as recommended by the BAAQMD. Exhaust emissions from construction equipment and trucks
for criteria pollutants would be below BAAQMD criteria pollutant thresholds as described in the RDEIR, and
would be further minimized through implementation of measures during construction activities.Therefore,
after applying these measures, the impact would be less than significant.
4.3 Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The proposed project would not affect special-status plant species but would result in
substantial adverse effects on special-status animal species, including California red-legged frog (CRLF),
nesting birds, and roosting bats.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a through BIO-1 d would reduce proposed project
adverse effects on special-status animal species to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
B1O-1a: Mitigation for impacts on regulated waters shall be provided at a minimum 2:1 ratio as
detailed in Mitigation Measure 131O-3. Mitigation for impacts on habitat for CRLF shall be
provided at a minimum 3:1 ratio for permanent impacts and 1:1 ratio for temporary impacts,
as detailed in Mitigation Measure 131O-1 b. In addition, the project Applicants shall obtain all
required permits from the USFWS, CDFW, RWQCB, and USACE (e.g., 1600 series permits, 404
and 401 permits), incidental take permits and any others. The project Applicants will submit
with the permit application a Wetland Mitigation Program for review and approval by the
regulatory agencies. The project Applicants shall implement mitigation measures, as
required by federal and State law and included in the permits, to avoid, minimize, or offset
impacts to any species listed under either the state or Federal Endangered Species Acts or
protected under any other state or federal law. Evidence that the project Applicants have
secured all required authorization from these agencies shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department of the City of Petaluma prior to issuance of any grading or
building permits for the project.
B1O-1 b: A Final California Red-Legged Frog Mitigation Plan (CRLFMP) shall be prepared by a
qualified wildlife biologist to minimize and mitigate potential impacts of the project on CRLF.
The Final CRLFMP shall be prepared in consultation with and be approved by the USFWS,
CDFW, USACE, and City, and shall provide for the protection, replacement, and
management of habitat for CRLF affected by proposed development and public open
space use on the project site.The Final CRLFMP shall be required as a condition of approval
for the project Tentative Map, and shall include the following components and meet the
following standards:
Preconstruction and Construction Avoidance Provisions
a. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a Service-approved biologist prior to
any grading or major vegetation clearance to ensure that no individual CRLF are lost
during construction. These preconstruction surveys shall also verify the presence or
absence of occupied dens of American badger, burrows of western burrowing owl,
and individuals of western pond turtle and foothill yellow-legged froa in the remote
instance individuals were to disperse onto the site in advance of construction-related
disturbance. The Final CRLFMP shall: 1) describe in detail the survey approach and
methodology, and 2) specify that grading or vegetation clearance may not occur in
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 19
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
any area where individual CRLF, American badger, western burrowing owl, western
pond turtle, and/or foothill yellow-legged frog are located until such time as the
individual has either moved out of the disturbance zone or has been physically
relocated by a Service-approved biologist legally authorized to handle the species.
Any relocation effort for CRLF,American badger,western burrowing owl,western pond
turtle, and/or foothill yellow-legged frog shall be formulated in consultation with and
approved by CDFW and USFWS, and shall be implemented by a qualified biologist.
b. All project-related -vegetation clearing and grading activities within potential habitat
for CRLF shall be monitored by a Service-approved biologist. The Final CRLFMP shall
specify the duties of the Service-approved biologist.
C. All construction personnel shall be trained in CRLF identification, habitat description,
legal protective status, construction restrictions, and procedures to avoid unnecessary
disturbance to potential habitat or incidental take of these species. The Final CRLFMP
shall describe this training program.
d. Exclusionary fencing shall be installed prior to grading or major vegetation clearance
where appropriate to keep CRLF out of construction areas. The Final CRLFMP shall
identify where such fencing is to be installed and provide procedures for fence
installation, monitoring, and maintenance. The Final CRLFMP shall require that the
exclusionary fencing be installed under the direct supervision of a Service-approved
biologist and shall be maintained during the course of construction activities on the
site.
e. If necessary, identify the locations for use of permanent exclusionary fencing or other
barriers to prevent and minimize dispersal of CRLF into areas with concentrated human
activity, based on input from the USFWS and CDFW. This may be particularly important
at locations along segments of the multi-use trail to the south of Kelly Creek or parking
lot and staging area on the east side of the D Street tributary,to prevent the movement
of individual frogs into areas, of intensive bike, pedestrian and vehicle activity. If used,
the permanent exclusionary fencing/barriers shall be designed and installed during
project construction under the supervision of a Service-approved biologist.
f. Appropriate signage shall be designed and installed to restrict unauthorized human
access into essential habitat areas for CRLF during construction.
Habitat Avoidance and Mitigation Provisions
g. Avoid development and associated direct and indirect impacts on CRLF in
accordance with project revisions required as part of the consultation review and
approval process with CDFW and USFWS. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided
at a minimum of 3:1 for permanent impacts and 1:1 for temporary impacts to CRLF
habitat. This may be accomplished through permanent protection and establishment
of two conservation easements or other mechanisms of suitable habitat on-site and
off-site, where necessary to achieve the minimum compensatory mitigation
requirements or as otherwise required by the CDFW and USFWS.
h. Control unauthorized access to the on-site stock pond and open space in the
southwestern portion of the project site to protect these essential habitat features for
CRLF. Install fencing and interpretive displays and restrictive signage along all trail
systems as necessary to control access from the proposed multi-use trails and other
locations where unauthorized access is likely.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 20
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
i. Where disturbance and improvements within essential habitat and movement
corridors cannot be completely avoided and on-site mitigation is considered
insufficient by the CDFW and USFWS, the loss shall be mitigated by permanently
preserving similar quality habitat known to support CRLF at off-site locations preferably
in the Petaluma vicinity of Sonoma County, as negotiated with the regulatory
agencies. It is possible that the mitigation location, whether on-site or possibly off-site
as well, could be used to achieve mitigation for other biological and wetland impacts,
depending on its habitat characteristics, provisions for habitat creation and/or
enhancement defined as part of the Final CRLFMP, and negotiations with the CDFW
and USFWS.
j. Identify methods to minimize the potential for harassment or take of listed and non-
listed species as a result of increased human activity associated with development
and open space use of the site. This shall include an educational program for future
residents and visitors, fencing and interpretive signage at access points into natural
open space, use of sensitive grade changes, culverted undercrossings, and bridged
overcrossings in uplands where roadways or trails bisect movement corridors, and
possible use of permanent exclusionary fencing.
Habitat Connectivity and On-Site Management Provisions
k. Define methods to provide connectivity for CRLF between open space areas on site
and to the surrounding undeveloped lands to the west, south, and east.
I. Provide for permanent protection and adaptive management of open space lands
(both on-site and possibly off-site) intended to function as potential habitat for CRLF.
BIO-lc: Any active nests of raptors or other birds protected under federal and state regulations in
the vicinity of construction shall be avoided until young birds are able to leave the nest (i.e.,
fledged) and forage on their own. Avoidance may be accomplished either by scheduling
grading, vegetation removal and demolition activities during the non-nesting period
(September 1 through January 31), or if this is not feasible, by conducting a pre-construction
survey for raptor and other bird nests. Provisions of the pre-construction survey and nest
avoidance, if necessary, shall include the following:
a. To avoid "take" of barn owls in the large barn, any relocation or restoration work shall
be initiated in the non-nesting period or shall be performed in conformance with the
pre-construction survey procedures detailed below.
b. If grading is scheduled during the active nesting period (February 15 through August
31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nest survey no more
than 15 days prior to initiation of grading to provide confirmation on presence or
absence of active nests in the vicinity.
C. If active nests are encountered, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a
qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At a
minimum, grading and vegetation removal in the vicinity of the nest shall be deferred
until the young birds have fledged or are no longer dependent on the nest. A nest-
setback zone shall be established within which all construction-related disturbances
shall be prohibited. These are typically at least 300 feet for all raptors and 100 feet for
other birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and State Fish and Game
Code, unless site-specific conditions allow for some variation from these distances as
determined by the qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW.The perimeter
of the nest-setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with staked
flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel restricted from the area.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 21
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
d. If permanent avoidance of the nest is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by
prohibiting disturbance within the nest-setback zone until a qualified biologist verifies
that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the
juveniles from the nest are foraging independently and capable of independent
survival.
e. Demolition of any existing buildings and removal of any trees shall also consider
possible bat use of the site, as defined below in Mitigation Measure BIO-1 d.
f. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that the young birds have fledged
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department of the City of
Petaluma prior to initiation of grading and vegetation removal in the nest-setback
zone.
1111O-1d: Measures shall be taken to avoid possible loss of bats during project construction. Any
buildings that are approved for demolition, rehabilitation, or relocation shall be done using
the following provisions:
a. Any buildings approved for removal shall be demolished between March 1 (or after
evening temperatures rise above 45 degrees F and/or no more than '/2" of rainfall
within 24 hours occurs) to April 15 or from August 31 to October 15 (or before evening
temperatures fall below 45 degrees F and/or more than '/2" of rainfall within 24 hours
occurs) to minimize the likelihood of removal during the winter roosting period when
individuals are less active and more difficult to detect, and the critical pupping period
(April 16 to August 30) when young cannot disperse.
b. Buildings shall be surveyed by a qualified bat biologist possessing a Memorandum of
Understanding with the CDFW no more than 2 weeks before demolition and/or
relocation work is undertaken to avoid "take" of any bats that may have begun to use
the structures for roosting subsequent to the assessments by Wildlife Research
Associates (2004 and 2014). The buildings in which roosting would be most likely to
occur are the large two-story barn, hay barn, and garage building.
C. If the pre-demolition survey reveals bats or bat roosting activity, all doors and windows
shall be opened and left open continually until demolition, relocation and/or
rehabilitation work is to begin. Additional recommendations may be made by the
qualified bat specialist following the pre-construction survey, including monitoring of
demolition and/or relocation and other measures to avoid take of individual bats.
d. A tree roost habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist
possessing a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFW of any trees that will be
removed as part of the project. The habitat assessment shall be conducted no more
than 2 weeks prior to tree removal and vegetation clearing. Additional detailed
measures may be required based on the results of the habitat assessment if evidence
of bat roosting is observed.This may include supervision of tree removal by the qualified
bat biologist, and systematic removal of selected trees and major limbs to encourage
dispersal and avoid "take" of individual bats.
Findinq for Impact 131O-1: Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a through BIO-1 d would reduce project impacts on
special status animal species to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a through BIO-1 d will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval
and will reduce Impact BIO-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The residential development is limited to 11.2 acres of the site (including 6.4 acres
of lots and street and 4.8 acres of private open space), all of which would be located at least 100 feet
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 22
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
from the centerline of Kelly Creek and outside of the critical habitat boundary for CRLF. In addition, the
project would preserve 47 acres of open space including designated critical habitat for CRLF that would
be protected in perpetuity through the establishment of two conservation easements. Further,the project
includes restoration and enhancement activities that would improve habitat for CRLF and other species.
Pursuant to existing regulations, the applicant is required to obtain all required authorizations from the
USACE,the RWQCB,the CDFW,the USFWS,and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction,for disturbance
to waters of the U.S. and associated aquatic habitat. In addition to all avoidance and minimization
measures as required by these resource agency authorizations, the identified mitigation measures would
reduce potential impacts of the Project on special status species and sensitive habitats. With completion
of the Project's WMP and implementation of the Project's CRLFMP, habitat for the CRLF will be restored.
Therefore, after applying these measures and regulatory requirements, the impact would be less than
significant.
Additionally, although no individuals of the American badger, burrows of western burrowing owl, and
individuals of western pond turtle or foothill yellow-legged frog are expected to occur based on surveys
and field investigations, and thus the Project would not result in a potentially significant impact to these
species, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 b(a), was modified to specifically include these species as part of the
pre-construction surveys and identifies avoidance or relocation in the event of discovery. No new impact
has been identified and no new mitigation is required to address potential future occupancy of the site
by American badger, burrows of western burrowing owl, and individuals of western pond turtle or foothill
yellow-legged frog. Nonetheless, to address concerns that these species may move onto the site,
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 b(a) was modified to include these species in the preconstruction survey.
Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Further, the required nesting surveys and protection of any identified nests or roosts would prevent harm
to special status bird and bat species, and would prevent harm to common types of birds.Therefore, after
applying these measures, the project's impacts would be less than significant.
Impact BIO-2: The proposed project would affect sensitive natural communities, including riparian
habitat, native grasslands, and regulated seasonal wetlands.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2a through BIO-2e would reduce project adverse
effects on sensitive natural communities, including riparian habitat, native grasslands, and regulated
seasonal wetlands to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-2a: A detailed Landscape and Vegetation Management Plan (Plan) shall be prepared by a
qualified landscape architect in consultation with CDFW and a plant ecologist experienced
with native species.The Plan shall: 1) provide for re-establishment of grassland, riparian, and
oak woodland cover on graded slopes in open space areas; 2) incorporate mitigation
requirements to replace and enhance wetland habitat and provide for replacement of
native trees removed as part of the project; 3) provide for replacement of native grasslands
lost as a result of development and trail improvements; 4) identify unsuitable species which
should not be used in landscaping; 5) prevent the establishment and spread of introduced
broom; and 6) specify long-term management provisions to ensure re-establishment of
native and ornamental landscape improvements. Aspects of the plan shall include, but will
not be limited to, the following:
a. Graded slopes in open space areas shall be reseeded with a mixture of native
perennial and annual grassland species to increase the diversity of the grassland
cover. Suitable species to be used in the seed mix include: California brome (Bromus
carinatus), purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra), creeping wildrye (Elymus tritichoides),
California poppy (Escscholtzia californica), among others. Highly invasive non-native
annuals, typically used for erosion control alone, should not be used.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 23
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
b. Landscaping and revegetation shall emphasize the use of native plant species along
the fringe of proposed development, and plantings in open space areas should be
restricted to native species.Suitable plant species for use in open space areas include:
valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), California buckeye
(Aesculus californica), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), California rose (Rosa
californica), creeping wildrye, and purple needlegrass, among other species.
C. Use of non-native, invasive species which may spread into adjacent undeveloped
open space areas shall be prohibited in landscaping plans. Unsuitable species include:
blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus), acacia (Acacia spp.), pampas grass
(Cortaderia selloana), broom (Cytisus spp.), gorse (Ulex europaeus), bamboo
(Bambusa spp.), giant reed (Arundo donax), periwinkle (Vinca spp.), English ivy
(Hedera helix),and German ivy (Senecio milanioides).This prohibition shall be included
in the CC&R for the proposed residential subdivision, as well as undeveloped areas to
be retained as permanent open space.
d. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent
establishment and spread of introduced broom species (Cytisus spp and Genista
monspesullana). This should apply to the lands on the project site that are placed
under a conservation easement as well as common open space areas. The removal
and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants
when soils are saturated and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the
spring before seed begins to set in late April.
e. Provisions for maintenance of landscaping and revegetation of graded slopes shall be
specified as part of the plan, with replacement plantings and seeding provided as
necessary to ensure re-establishment of cover. Tree replacement shall be at ratios
consistent with Mitigation Measure BIO-2d below and meet with the intent of Petaluma
Municipal Code Section 20.32.320. Maintenance and monitoring of mitigation and
habitat enhancement plantings in open space areas shall be provided for a minimum
of five years.
f. Vehicles and motorcycles shall not be allowed to travel off designated roadways and
limits of grading to minimize future disturbance to grassland cover and other
vegetation, and unauthorized access to the surrounding undeveloped lands and
open space.
1111O-2b: The Tree Preservation Plans shall be updated and refined to comply with the requirements
of IZO Chapter 17.The Grading Plan and Landscape Plan shall include the mapped location
of tree trunks, including those which will be preserved or removed, show the recommended
tree protection zones, and identify locations of construction-restriction fencing.
1111O-2c: A Tree Replacement Program shall be prepared as part of the Landscape and Vegetation
Management Plan to provide for replacement of individual native trees removed by
proposed development. The Tree Replacement Program shall provide for replacement of
impacted individual native trees consistent with Petaluma Municipal Code Section 20.32.320
and Implementing Zoning Ordinance Section 17.065, and shall be accomplished on-site in
designated open space areas. Tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a
minimum of 5 years by a qualified biologist or landscape specialist. All water used for
temporary irrigation shall be from wells and/or municipal supplies and not diverted out of
Kelly Creek, the stock pond or tributary drainages to prevent any potential secondary
adverse impacts to existing aquatic habitats. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period
shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis to maintain the replacement values
specified in the Municipal Code and Implementing Ordinance.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 24
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
BIO-2d: To avoid creation of informal trails through native grasslands on Helen Putnam Regional Park
adjacent to the project site, the existing fence between the project site and the regional
park to the north of Kelly Creek shall be maintained and strengthened to control
unauthorized entry into the regional park from the terminus of the Kelly Creek multi-use trail.
As and when the regional park trail project is constructed, the fence may be removed.
BIO-2e: A Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program (Program) shall be developed
by a qualified biologist in consultation with CDFW to address the loss of native grasslands on
the site and provide for adequate replacement. The Program shall define short-term
construction controls and long-term maintenance requirements necessary to ensure
grasslands are successfully reestablished and existing and restored native grasslands remain
viable.The maintenance and management requirements shall include provisions for annual
invasive species removal, and control on the establishment of both native and non-native
trees and shrubs that could eventually shade out the grassland to be protected. The Final
Program shall be subject to review and approval by the City and CDFW. The Program shall
contain the following provisions and performance standards:
a. The proposed limits of grading and enhancement tree plantings shall be modified to
avoid additional areas of the stands of native grassland on the site and a
compensatory mitigation component prepared and implemented to provide a
minimum 1:1 replacement ratio for grasslands lost as a result of the project.
b. Areas retained or restored as native grassland shall be permanently protected as open
space and managed as native grassland by deed restriction or conservation
easement.
C. To prevent inadvertent disturbance of native grassland to be preserved, these areas
shall be flagged in the field prior to any vegetation removal or grading for habitat
restoration, and temporary orange construction fencing installed under supervision of
the qualified biologist around all areas to be retained within 50 feet of proposed
disturbance.
d. Areas of native grassland within the limits of proposed grading and construction shall
be salvaged and used in revegetation efforts implemented as part of the Program.
Salvage material may include mature seed and intact stem and root material, which
shall be stored and maintained until ready for reinstallation in the late fall/early winter
when conditions are optimal for successful reestablishment.
e. Personnel involved in habitat restoration activities shall be trained by the qualified
biologist over the sensitivity of the native grasslands, purpose of the temporary orange
construction fencing, and that all construction-related disturbance should be
restricted outside of the fence.
f. A monitoring program shall be implemented by the qualified biologist to oversee
successful establishment of any native grasslands to be restored, and shall define both
short-term and long-term requirements. Permanent monitoring transects shall be
established as part of the program and vegetation data collected in the spring and
summer months when plant identification is possible. Photo stations shall be established
along each monitoring transect, and photographs taken every year during the
required monitoring period. Performance standards,success criteria,and contingency
measures shall be defined as part of the Program. Monitoring transects shall be
established over each location to be vegetated as native grassland, and monitored
on an annual basis. Within a five-year period, native grass shall be successfully
established over all treatment areas and shall comprise a minimum 50 percent of the
relative cover. Monitoring shall be extended where the success criteria are not met,
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 25
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
and the minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is not reached. The Program and its
requirements may be modified to require further measures if monitoring shows that
performance standards are not being met.
g. Annual monitoring reports shall be prepared by the qualified biologist and submitted
to the CDFW and Community Development Department of the City of Petaluma by
December 31 of each monitoring year, for a minimum of five years or until the defined
success criteria are met.The annual report shall summarize the results of the monitoring
effort, performance standards, and any required contingency measures, and shall
include photographs of the monitoring transects and program success. Maps shall be
included in the monitoring report to show the location of monitoring transects and
photo stations.
Finding for Impact BIO-2: Mitigation Measures BIO-2a through BIO-2e would reduce proposed project
impacts on sensitive natural communities, including riparian habitat, native grasslands, and regulated
seasonal wetlands to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Measures BIO-2a through BIO-2e will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact BIO-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The residential development is limited to 11.2 acres of the site (including 6.4 acres
of lots and streets and 4.8 acres of private open space), all of which would be located at least 100 feet
from the centerline of Kelly Creek and outside of the critical habitat boundary for CRLF. In addition, the
project would preserve 47 acres of open space including designated critical habitat for CRLF, riparian
habitat, and native grasslands that would be protected in perpetuity through the establishment of two
conservation easements. Further, the project includes restoration and enhancement activities that would
improve habitat for CRLF and other species. Pursuant to existing regulations, the applicant is required to
obtain authorizations from the USACE, the RWQCB, the CDFW, the USFWS, and other regulatory agencies
with jurisdiction,for the disturbance of waters of the U.S. and their associated riparian habitat and seasons
wetlands. In addition to all avoidance and minimization measures as required by these resource agency
authorizations, the identified mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts of the Project on other
sensitive habitats. With completion of the Project's WMP, and implementation of the Project's Landscape
and Vegetation Management Plan, and Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program, the
impacts would be less than significant
Impact BIO-3: The proposed project would have a substantial adverse effect on state and federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3 would reduce the project's adverse effects on
state and federally protected wetlands to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
BIO-3 A Final Wetland Replacement and Enhancement Program (WREP) shall be prepared and
implemented to compensate for the loss of jurisdictional waters on the project site.The Final
WREP shall be prepared by a qualified wetland consultant in consultation with and for review
and approval by the City, the RWQCB, the USACE, and the CDFW. The Final WREP shall
clearly identify the total wetlands and other jurisdictional areas affected by the project, shall
identify compensatory mitigation to replace wetland habitat lost as a result of development,
and provide for re-establishment, enhancement, and/or replacement of wetlands.The Final
WREP shall include the following performance standards:
a. Identify the location(s) of mitigation sites and provide for replacement of wetland
habitat loss at a minimum replacement ratio of 2:1. Create or restore wetlands with
high functions and values in accordance with USACE and RWQCB standards.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 26
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Compensatory mitigation can be achieved through on- or off-site habitat creation or
through the use of an approved mitigation bank, or a combination thereof.
b. Specify performance criteria, maintenance and long-term management
responsibilities, monitoring requirements, and contingency measures. This shall include
expanding the compensatory mitigation to achieve a replacement ratio of at least 2:1
(or as otherwise required by regulatory agencies). Monitoring shall be conducted by
the project applicant's consulting wetland specialist for a minimum of five years and
continue until the success criteria are met.
C. Define site grading, preparation and revegetation procedures, an implementation
schedule, and funding sources to ensure long-term management of the Final WREP.
d. The mitigation (habitat restoration or enhancement) effort shall be considered
successful when the performance standards are met. Performance standards would
be met when the habitat has sustained itself for a minimum of two years in the absence
of significant maintenance measures.
Subsequent permitting processes with resource agencies could result in additional mitigation
beyond that required by the City in the CEQA process. Any additional mitigation required
by the agencies (the RWQCB, the USACE, and the CDFW) would be incorporated as
conditions of their permit authorization.
Findinq for Impact BIO-3: Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would reduce proposed project impacts on state and
federally protected wetlands to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure BIO-3 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce
Impact BIO-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The project proposes to avoid and retain a majority of the onsite wetlands and
includes restoration of Kelly Creek. Impacts to regulated waters would be limited to an estimated 0.13
acres. Restoration activities and establishment of conservation easements would be sufficient to
accommodate the required 2:1 replacement ratio onsite. Pursuant to existing regulations, the applicant
is required to obtain all required authorizations from the USACE, the RWQCB, the CDFW, the USFWS, and
other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction,for the disturbance of state and federally protected wetlands.
With completion of the Project's Final WREP, the impacts would be less than significant
Impact BIO-4:The proposed project would interfere substantially with the movement of native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4a through BIO-4d would reduce proposed project
adverse effects on the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites to less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-4a: An interpretive program shall be developed by a qualified biologist in cooperation with
the project landscape architect which serves to educate park visitors and trail users of
the sensitivity of Kelly Creek and D Street tributary as wildlife movement corridors, and
the importance of remaining outside the southern portion of the site to protect the stock
pond and surrounding uplands to CRLF and other wildlife that are sensitive to human
disturbance. The interpretive program shall be integrated into the final Landscape Plan
for the project. Interpretive elements of the program shall include use of permanent
signage at the trail heads, all pedestrian bridge crossings, and other critical locations.
The signage shall explain the sensitivity of the open space for wildlife and the importance
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 27
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
of staying on the improved trails and out of restricted areas. Dogs, cats, and other pets
shall be leashed at all times in the open space areas on the site, and signage shall be
provided at the trail heads at D Street and Windsor Drive explaining this restriction and
need to prevent harassment of wildlife by unleashed pets.
BIO-4b: The existing plywood barrier fence on the east side of the D Street concrete box culvert
undercrossing shall be removed as part of initial construction activities to improve
opportunities for wildlife movement along the Kelly Creek corridor. Replacement fencing
at this undercrossing shall be prohibited to prevent future obstruction of wildlife
movement along Kelly Creek.
BIO-4c: Fencing, signage, dense native vegetation, and other deterrents shall be used as part
of the interpretive program to adequately contain livestock, equestrians and other
visitors with their pets from sensitive wildlife areas, including Kelly Creek, the D Street
tributary, and stock pond. Exclusionary fencing used to contain livestock and control
access by visitors and their pets shall be wildlife-friendly in design, such as barbed wire
with a smooth bottom wire. Signs shall be posted along the trails limiting access of
equestrian to designated trails at all times.
BIO-4d: The existing fencing between the western boundary of the project site and Helen
Putnam Regional Park south of Kelly Creek shall be removed where it borders lands to
be dedicated as permanent open space on the project site, and replaced with wildlife-
friendly fencing, such as barbed wire with smooth bottom wire, if fencing is necessary.
This would improve opportunities for wildlife movement between the existing parklands
and the future open space lands on the project site.
Finding for Impact BIO-4: Mitigation Measures BIO-4a through BIO-4d would reduce proposed project
impacts on the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures BIO-4a through BIO-4d
will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact BIO-4 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding:The project would preclude residential development south of Kelly Creek and within
100 feet of the Kelly Creek centerline. Restoration activities including enhancements to the stock pond,
bank stabilization, removal of invasive species, introduction of native species, and planting of
approximately 327 trees would ensure that movement of native species is retained. Approximately 47
acres of open space would be established and preserved in perpetuity through two conservation
easements including Kelly Creek, its tributaries, and the stock pond. Pursuant to the mitigation measures,
installation of interpretive signage, cultivation of dense native vegetation, and the installation of wildlife-
friendly barrier fencing, would reduce human disturbance, and improve opportunities for wildlife
movement, and impacts would be less than significant.
Impact BIO-5:The proposed project would conflict with a local policy for protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2c (above) would reduce project impacts related
to protected trees to less than significant.
Finding for Impact BIO-5: Mitigation Measure BIO-2c (above) would reduce project impacts to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measure BIO-2c will be incorporated
into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact BIO-5 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The project proposed the removal of 30 protected trees (which represents an
estimated 6%of the 472 total protected trees onsite) and the replanting of approximately 327 trees,which
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 28
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
exceeds the City's required replacement ratio. Pursuant to the mitigation measure, implementation of a
Tree Replacement Program as part of the Landscape and Vegetation Management Plan,would mitigate
project impacts to less than less than significant.
RPT Impact B1O-1: Implementation of the proposed RPT project could result in potential impacts to special-
status plant and wildlife species, including California red-legged frog, special-status plant species, and
nesting birds, which would be a significant impact.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT 11310-1 a through RPT 11310-1 d would reduce RPT
project adverse effects on special-status plant and wildlife species to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
RPT 11310-1 a: Sonoma County Regional Parks or its agent shall obtain all required permits before
construction from the USFWS, CDFW, RWQCB, and USACE (e.g., 1600 series permits, 404
and 401 permits), incidental take permits and any others and implement mitigation
measures, as required by federal and State law, to avoid, minimize, or offset impacts to
any species listed under either the state or Federal Endangered Species Acts or
protected under any other state or federal law.
RPT 1310-1 b: A Final California Red-Legged Frog Mitigation Plan (CRLFMP) shall be prepared by a
qualified wildlife biologist to minimize and mitigate potential impacts of the project on
CRLF.The Final CRLFMP shall be prepared in consultation with USFWS, CDFW, and USACE
and shall provide for the protection, replacement, and management of habitat for CRLF
affected by the regional park trail. The Final CRLFMP shall include the following
components and meet the following standards:
a. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a Service-approved biologist prior to
any grading or vegetation clearance to ensure that no individual CRLF are lost during
construction. The Final CRLFMP shall: 1) describe in detail the survey approach and
methodology, and 2) specify that grading or vegetation clearance may not occur
in any area where individual CRLF are located until such time as the individual has
either moved out of the disturbance zone or has been physically relocated by a
Service-approved biologist legally authorized to handle the species.
b. All vegetation clearing and grading activities within potential habitat for CRLF shall
be monitored by a Service-approved biologist. The Final CRLFMP shall specify the
duties of the Service-approved biologist.
c. All construction personnel shall be trained in CRLF identification, habitat description,
legal protective status, construction restrictions, and procedures to avoid
unnecessary disturbance to potential habitat or incidental take of these species. The
Final CRLFMP shall describe this training program.
d. Exclusionary fencing shall be installed prior to grading or major vegetation clearance
where appropriate to keep CRLF out of construction areas, if required by the USFWS
and/or CDFW. The Final CRLFMP shall identify where such fencing is to be installed
and provide procedures for fence installation, monitoring, and maintenance, if
required. The exclusionary fencing be installed under the direct supervision of a
Service-approved biologist and shall be maintained during the course of
construction activities on the site.
e. Sonoma County Regional Parks shall prohibit access by unleashed dogs and require
that dogs be leashed, and that access be limited to designated trails at all times to
minimize the potential for inadvertent take of CRLF.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 29
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
f. Sonoma County Regional Parks shall post signs along the trails limiting access of
equestrian to designated trails at all times.
g. Sonoma County Regional Parks shall implement measures to minimize the potential
for harassment or take of listed and non-listed species as a result of increased human
activity associated with the proposed trail.This shall include an educational program
for future part visitors, signage at access points into open space and other key
locations, and possible use of permanent exclusionary fencing, if required by the
USFWS. Appropriate interpretive signage shall be provided instructing park users on
access rules to prevent inadvertent take of CRLF.
RPT 11310-1c: Active nests of raptor, loggerhead shrike, or other birds protected under federal and
state regulations in the vicinity of construction shall be avoided until young birds are able
to leave the nest (i.e., fledged) and forage on their own. Avoidance may be
accomplished either by scheduling grading, vegetation removal and revegetation
activities during the non-nesting period (August 30 through February 14), or if this is not
feasible, by conducting a pre-construction survey for raptor, loggerhead shrike, and
other bird nests. Provisions of the pre-construction survey and nest avoidance, if
necessary, shall include the following:
a. If grading is scheduled during the active nesting period (February 15 through August
31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nest survey no more
than 15 days prior to initiation of grading to provide confirmation on presence or
absence of active nests in the vicinity.
b. If active nests are encountered, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a
qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At
a minimum, grading in the vicinity of the nest shall be deferred until the young birds
have fledged. A nest-setback zone of at least 300 feet for all raptors and 100 feet for
loggerhead shrike and other birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall
be established within which all construction-related disturbances shall be prohibited.
The perimeter of the nest-setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated
with staked flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel restricted from
the area.
c. If permanent avoidance of the nest is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by
prohibiting disturbance within the nest-setback zone until a qualified biologist verifies
that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the
juveniles from the nest are foraging independently and capable of independent
survival at an earlier date.
d. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that the young have fledged shall
be submitted to the Sonoma County Regional Parks prior to initiation of grading in
the nest-setback zone.
RPT 1131O-11d: In advance of any trail construction through the Helen Putnam Regional Park,a qualified
botanist shall conduct detailed preconstruction surveys in spring and summer to confirm
absence of any special-status plant species along the trail alignment. The survey shall
focus on special-status plant species considered to have a potential for occurrence in
grassland,woodland scrub and riparian habitats from the Petaluma vicinity, and shall be
conducted according to the latest CDFW survey guidelines. The surveys shall be
completed and a report of findings shall be submitted to the Sonoma County Regional
Parks before the start of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 30
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
If populations of any special-status plant species are encountered along the trail
alignment, then Sonoma County Regional Parks shall ensure that construction-related
impacts are avoided through changes in trail alignment or adequately mitigated by
retaining a qualified botanist to develop and implement a Special-Status Plant Species
Mitigation and Monitoring Program (Program).A Program shall only be required if a listed
species or those maintained on Lists 1 B or 2 of the CNPS Inventory are encountered
during the preconstruction survey and cannot be avoided. Potential impacts on any
species maintained on Lists 3 and 4 of the CNPS Inventory would not be considered
significant and no additional mitigation would be required for these species if
encountered during the preconstruction survey.
The Program shall be prepared in consultation with the CDFW and shall be approved by
Sonoma County Regional Park prior to any initial ground-disturbing activity or
construction. The Program shall be based on the status and vulnerability of the species
present with avoidance of all or a majority of any population(s) the preferred method of
mitigation. Where complete or even partial avoidance of any special-status plant
population(s) is considered infeasible, options for mitigation may include salvage and
re-establishing the population at an alternative, suitable location. Details of any salvage
and habitat recreation effort shall include the following criteria and performance
standards:
a. Collection of seeds/roots/vegetative material during the appropriate
developmental stage of the plant.
b. Procedures for sowing/replanting techniques appropriate to the life cycle of the
plant.
c. Development of a maintenance and monitoring plan specific to the environmental
conditions necessary for survival of the new population. Maintenance and
monitoring shall be provided for a minimum of five years to determine success of re-
seeding and habitat creation, and need for additional preservation.
d. Identification of funding sources by Sonoma County Regional Parks to provide
implementation of the Program in consultation with the qualified plant ecologist.
e. In addition, preservation of another existing occurrence of the affected special-
status plant species shall be required if monitoring indicates that the re-establishment
efforts have not been successful after five years. The preservation program shall
provide for permanent protection of a different existing population in Sonoma
County, which is equal or larger in size than that encountered on the site (minimum
1:1 replacement),through land acquisition, use of a conservation easement,or some
other permanent land protection method. Any off-site mitigation lands shall include
establishment of a management endowment as necessary to provide for long-term
management of the preserved population.
Findinq for Impact RPT BIO-1:Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-1 a through RPT BIO-1 d would reduce RPT project
adverse effects on special-status plant and wildlife species to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-1 a through RPT BIO-1 d will be incorporated into
the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact RPT BIO-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Pursuant to existing regulations,Sonoma County Regional Parks is required to obtain
all required authorizations from the USACE, the RWQCB, the CDFW, the USFWS, and other regulatory
agencies with jurisdiction, for the disturbance of waters of the U.S. and their associated aquatic habitat.
In addition to all avoidance and minimization measures as required by these resource agency
authorizations, the identified mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts of the RPT project on
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 31
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
special status species and sensitive habitats. With the acquisition of all required permits before
construction, and implementation of the Project's CRLFMP, habitat for the CRLF will be restored.Therefore,
after applying these measures and regulatory requirements, impacts would be less than significant.
The required nesting surveys and protection of any identified nests or roost would prevent harm to special
status bird and bat species, and would prevent harm to common types of birds.Therefore, after applying
these measures, the impact would be less than significant.
The required preconstruction surveys, and the implementation of a Special-Status Plant Species Mitigation
and Monitoring Program would prevent harm to special status plant species. Therefore, after applying
these measures, the impact would be less than significant.
RPT Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the proposed regional park trail project would result in potential
impacts to a sensitive natural community as a result of trail construction, which would be a significant
impact.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-2 would reduce RPT project adverse effects on
a sensitive natural community to less than significant.
Miticiation Measure
RPT B1O-2: A Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program (Program) shall be
developed by a qualified biologist to address the loss of native grasslands along the trail
alignment and provide for adequate replacement. The Program shall contain the
following provisions and performance standards:
a) Under the supervision of a qualified biologist, the proposed limits of grading shall be
modified and controlled to avoid areas of native grassland along the trail alignment
to the maximum extent feasible and a compensatory mitigation component
prepared and implemented to provide a minimum 1:1 replacement ratio for
grasslands lost as a result of trail improvements.
b) Areas of native grassland adjacent to the trail alignment shall be flagged in the field
prior to any vegetation removal or grading, and temporary orange construction
fencing installed under supervision of the qualified biologist to avoid any inadvertent
damage.
c) Construction personnel shall be trained by the qualified biologist over the sensitivity
of the native grasslands, purpose of the temporary orange construction fencing, and
that all construction-related disturbance should be restricted outside of the fence.
d) Areas of native grassland within the limits of proposed grading and construction shall
be salvaged and used in revegetation efforts implemented as part of the Program.
Salvage material shall include seed and both intact stem and root material, which
shall be stored and maintained until ready for reinstallation in the late fall/early winter
when conditions are optimal for successful reestablishment.
e) A monitoring program shall be implemented by the qualified biologist to oversee
successful establishment of any native grasslands to be restored, and shall define
both short-term and long-term requirements. The Program and its requirements may
be modified to require further measures if monitoring shows that performance
standards are not being met.
f) Annual monitoring reports shall be prepared by the qualified biologist for a minimum
of five years or until the defined success criteria are met. The annual report shall
summarize the results of the monitoring effort, performance standards, and any
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 32
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
required contingency measures, and shall include photographs of the monitoring
transects and program success. Maps shall be included in the monitoring report to
show the location of monitoring transects and photo stations
Finding for Impact RPT BIO-2: Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-2 would reduce RPT project adverse effects on
a sensitive natural community to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure RPT BIO-2 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact RPT BIO-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: A Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program (Program) shall be
developed by a qualified biologist to address the loss of native grasslands along the trail alignment and
provide for adequate replacement and on-going monitoring. In addition to all avoidance and
minimization measures identified in the mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts of the RPT
project on this sensitive natural community. Therefore, after applying these measures and regulatory
requirements, impacts would be less than significant.
RPT Impact BIO-3: Implementation of the proposed regional park trail project would result in potential
impacts to jurisdictional waters as a result of trail construction, which would be a significant impact.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-3 would reduce RPT project adverse effects on
jurisdictional waters to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
RPT B1O-3: As called for in Mitigation Measure RPT BIO-1 a, authorizations shall be secured by
Sonoma County Regional Parks or its agent from the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW for
proposed trail improvements where they pass through jurisdictional waters, and all
conditions and mitigation measures required under these authorizations shall be
implemented as part of the project. Appropriate measures shall be developed and
implemented to minimize disturbance to jurisdictional waters, prevent erosion and
sedimentation, and revegetate areas disturbed by trail construction.This shall include: 1)
construction during the dry season after all affected drainages are dry and surface
water is absent; 2) installation of temporary orange construction fencing at the limits of
proposed construction at the drainage crossings and vicinity of wetland seeps in
advance of grading and other disturbance; 3) use of BMPs to minimize the potential for
erosion and sedimentation such as installation of straw wattle,jute fabric or other surface
controls on graded slopes within 30 feet of the drainage crossings; and 4) revegetation
of all disturbed slopes outside the actual footprint of the trail through broadcast seeding
with native grass and forb seed or other technique within 30 feet of the drainage
crossings.
Finding for Impact RPT BIO-3: Mitigation Measures RPT BIO-3 would reduce RPT project adverse effects on
jurisdictional waters to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Measure RPT BIO-3 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact
RPT BIO-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Pursuant to existing regulations,Sonoma County Regional Parks is required to obtain
all required authorizations from the USACE, the RWQCB, the CDFW, the USFWS, and other regulatory
agencies with jurisdiction, for the disturbance of waters of the U.S. and their associated aquatic habitat.
In addition to all avoidance and minimization measures as required by these resource agency
authorizations, the identified mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts of the RPT project on
jurisdictional waters. Therefore, after applying these measures and regulatory requirements, impacts
would be less than significant.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 33
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
RPT Impact BIO-5: Implementation of the proposed regional park trail project could result in a significant
conflict with local plans and policies.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT 1310-1a and RPT 131O-3 (above) would eliminate RPT
project conflicts with local plans and policies to less than significant.
Findinq for Impact 131O-5: Mitigation Measure RPT BIO-1 a and RPT BIO-3 (above) would reduce project
impacts to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures RPT 1310-
1 a and RPT BIO-3 will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact RPT
131O-5 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Pursuant to the mitigation measure, consulting with the regulatory agencies, along
with the acquisition of the appropriate permits, would mitigate the potential for conflicts with local plans
and policies to less than less than significant
Cumulative Impact 131O-1: The proposed Scott Ranch project and the regional park trail project, in
conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development, could result in
significant cumulative impacts on biological resources.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures 1310-1 a, 1310-1 b, 131O-3, RPT 1310-1 a, RPT 1310-1 b, RPT 11I0-
3 and HYD-la, (above and below) would reduce project cumulative impacts to biological resources to
less than significant.
Findinq for Cumulative Impact BIO-1: Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a, BIO-1 b, BIO-3, RPT BIO-1 a, RPT BIO-1 b,
RPT BIO-3 and HYD-1 a (above and below) would reduce cumulative project impacts to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a, BIO-1 b, BIO-3, RPT 1310-
1 a, RPT BIO-1 b, RPT BIO-3 and HYD-1 a will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and
will reduce Cumulative Impact BIO-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Findinq: Cumulative development contributes to an incremental reduction in the amount of
existing wildlife habitat, particularly for birds, bats, and larger mammals. Habitat for species intolerant of
human disturbance would be lost as development encroaches into previously undeveloped areas,
disrupting or eliminating movement corridors and fragmenting the remaining suitable habitat retained
within parks, private open space, or undeveloped properties. As discussed above, the proposed project
would result in less-than-significant impact associated with the disturbance of wildlife habitat with the
implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a, BIO-1 b, and BIO-3. Additionally, development may also
contribute to degradation of the aquatic and riparian habitat of creeks and tributaries in the area.
Grading associated with construction activities generally increases erosion and sedimentation,and urban
pollutants from new development would reduce water quality. As discussed in RDEIR Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality, rolling dips, switchbacks, and other hydrologic control measures would be
incorporated in order to limit concentration of flow to creeks. In addition, appropriate erosion control and
runoff protection measures would be incorporated at and near streams and crossings to provide
additional protection against hydrologic impacts.
With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 a, BIO-1 b, and BIO-3, HYD-1 a, contribution of the
proposed project to the reduction of wildlife habitat would not be cumulatively considerable. Similarly,
the regional park trail would not result in cumulatively considerable impact on wildlife habitat with
implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT-131O-1 a, RPT-131O-1 b, and RPT-131O-3.
With regard to development of the project site and its relationship to surrounding habitat, the proposed
project would contribute to a cumulative loss of grassland and woodland habitat in the area, converting
approximately 6.4 acres of grassland to suburban residential development. However, a majority of the
grasslands on the balance of the project site, 47 acres,would be permanently protected and enhanced
through establishment of two conservation easements, and substantial grassland habitat would remain
to the south of the project site and to the west in Helen Putnam Regional Park. Opportunities for foraging
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 34
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
and dispersal from Helen Putnam Regional Park across the site and to locations to the east and southeast
would be reduced as a result of proposed development and the effects of increased activity by humans
and their pets. Mitigation measures would offset the potentially significant impacts of the project on
sensitive resources, and would any project-related contribution to cumulative impacts on biological and
wetland resources. Thus, with recommended mitigation incorporated, the cumulative biological impacts
of the proposed Scott Ranch project and the RPT would be less than significant.
4.4 Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-la and CUL-lb would reduce proposed project
adverse effects on historical resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
CUL-la Prior to the relocation of the barn structures, a qualified historic preservation architect
shall be selected by the City of Petaluma to review the relocation plans and verify that
the relocation is not affecting the building structures and character defining features. To
ensure the barn structures would retain their eligibility for the local designation, the barn
structures shall be relocated within the same general area and the new location shall
be compatible with their original character and use.
CUL-1 b The Applicants shall retain a qualified preservation architect to oversee the relocation
process and ensure that all the relocation activities are implemented in compliance with
the relocation plans reviewed under Mitigation Measure CUL-1 a.
Finding for Impact CUL-1: Mitigation Measures CUL-1 a and CUL-1 b would reduce proposed project
impacts on historical resources to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measures CUL-1 a and CUL-1 b will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval
and will reduce Impact CUL-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The proposed project would retain and stabilize the existing barn complex and the
old dairy equipment cleaning shed. As necessary the barns may be relocated farther away from the
creek to ensure structural stability of the barns, provide a sound foundation, and/or prevent the barns
from eventually collapsing into Kelly Creek. Mitigation Measures Cul-1 a and CUL-1 b,would require review
of the relocation plans and oversight of relocation activities by a qualified historic preservation architect.
With implementation of Mitigation Measures Cul-1 a and CUL-1 b, the proposed project impact to historic
resources would be less than significant.
Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c would reduce proposed
project adverse effects on historical resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
CUL-2a: Prior to excavation and construction on the proposed project site,the prime construction
contractor and any subcontractor(s) shall be informed by a qualified archaeologist
retained by the project Applicants, on the legal and/or regulatory implications of
knowingly destroying cultural resources or removing historic or prehistoric artifacts,
human remains,and other cultural materials from the project site as outlined in Mitigation
Measure CUL-2b below.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 35
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
CUL-2b: Prior to commencing any demolition, excavation or other ground-disturbing activities,
the project Applicants shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction
activity. The City shall approve the selected project archaeologist prior to issuance of
the grading and/or demolition permit. The selected project archaeologist shall be
present at the preconstruction meeting to discuss what protocols should be followed
with respect to the potential discovery of prehistoric or historic artifacts of possible
significance. The selected project archaeologist shall have the authority to perform full
time or spot check monitoring of subsurface construction and watch for and evaluate
artifacts or resources that may be uncovered.
The selected project archaeologist shall have the authority to halt excavation and
construction activities in the immediate vicinity (distance to be determined by the
project archaeologist) of a find if significant or potentially significant cultural resources
are exposed and could be adversely affected by construction operations. Construction
activities could continue in other areas of the project site where no cultural resources
have been identified.
CUL-2c: Should archaeological resources be encountered during ground-disturbing activities
(i.e., grading and excavation), the project archaeologist shall initiate sampling,
identification, and evaluation of the resources. If the archaeological resources are found
to be significant,the archaeologist shall take appropriate actions in conjunction with the
City for preservation and/or data recovery, including recordation with the California
Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) and professional museum curation as
appropriate. Following the completion of evaluation and data recovery, the
archaeologist shall prepare a professional report detailing the results of the find and
submit it to the City of Petaluma Community Development Department and to CHRIS
along with a DPR form to ensure that resource inventories are accurately updated.
Finding for Impact CUL-2: Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c would reduce proposed project
impacts on archeological resources to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds
that Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of
approval and will reduce Impact CUL-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: There is the possibility of encountering unrecorded cultural deposits during
excavation and grading of the project, especially because of the presence of a known pre-historic site
to the north of the project site and the presence of a water source (Kelly Creek) within the project site.
Additional prehistoric cultural sites and objects may exist in the project area, but may be obscured by
vegetation or buried by fill or natural sediments. Without proper care during the grading and excavation
phases of the proposed project, unknown and potentially significant historic and prehistoric
archaeological resources could be damaged or destroyed, if present. With implementation of Mitigation
Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c, the proposed project impacts to archeological resources would be
less than significant.
Impact CUL-3: The proposed project could disturb unknown human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce proposed project adverse effects
on unknown human remains to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
CUL-3 Procedures to be implemented following the discovery of human remains have been
mandated by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources Code Section
5097.98 and the California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(e) (CEQA). According
to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are discovered at the project site during
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 36
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
construction, work at the specific construction area at which the remains have been
uncovered shall be suspended, and the City of Petaluma and County of Sonoma
coroner shall be immediately notified. If the remains are determined by the County
coroner to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall
be notified within 24 hours, who will, in turn, notify the person the NAHC identifies as the
most likely descendent ("MLD") of any human remains.The guidelines of the NAHC shall
be adhered to in the treatment and subsequent disposition of the remains. Further
actions shall be determined, in part, by the desires of the MLD. The MLD has 48 hours to
make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains following notification
from the NAHC of the discovery. If the MILD does not make recommendations within 48
hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, re-inter the remains in an area of the
property secure from further disturbance.Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the
MLD's recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the
NAHC.
Finding for Impact CUL-3:Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce proposed project impacts on unknown
human remains to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Measure CUL-3 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact
CUL-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: No known human burials have been identified on the project site or within recorded
resources located in the vicinity. However, it is possible that unknown human remains could occur on the
project site, and if proper care is not taken during the project's grading and excavating phases, damage
to or destruction of these unknown remains could occur, if present. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
CUL-3 would ensure that impacts to buried human remains, if present onsite, would be reduced to less
than significant levels.
Impact CUL-4: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c, and CUL-3 (above) would
reduce proposed project adverse effects on tribal cultural resources to less than significant.
Finding for Impact CUL-4: Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through CUL-2c, and CUL-3 (above) would reduce
project impacts to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures
CUL-2a through CUL-2c, and CUL-3 will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact CUL-4 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Having notified the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria in accordance with AB
52 (refer to Appendix 4.3 of the RDEIR), having followed up with the request to consult with Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria including providing requested materials and records, and having received
no further response for consultation, the City has determined that with the Mitigation Measures CUL-2a
through CUL-2c, and CUL-3, outlined above, that require avoiding inadvertent impacts to prehistoric
resources and human remains, should they be encountered during excavation and grading, the
proposed project would not affect any known or unknown tribal cultural resources in the area.Therefore,
with mitigation the proposed project would result in a is less than significant impact on tribal cultural
resources.
RPT Impact CUL-1:The implementation of the proposed RPT project would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a historical resource but could significantly affect unknown archaeological
resources, human remains, and tribal cultural resources.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures RPT CUL-la and RPT CUL-lb would reduce RPT project
adverse effects on unknown archaeological resources, human remains, and tribal cultural resources to
less than significant.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 37
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Mitigation Measures
RPT CUL-1 a: If archaeological materials, artifacts, culturally modified soil deposits, or other indicators
of a potentially significant cultural resource are encountered anywhere in the project
site,all work should be halted in the vicinity and an archaeologist consulted immediately.
RPT CUL-1 b: If human remains are encountered anywhere on the property, all work must stop in the
immediate vicinity of the discovered remains and the County Coroner and a qualified
archaeologist must be notified immediately so that an evaluation can be performed.
If the remains are deemed to be Native American and prehistoric, the Native American
Heritage Commission must be contacted by the Coroner so that a "Most Likely
Descendant" can be designated
Finding for Impact RPT CUL-1: Mitigation Measures RPT CUL-1 a and RPT CUL-1 b would reduce project
impacts to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures RPT CUL-
1 a and RPT CUL-1 b will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact
RPT CUL-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Although there are no known archaeological resources on the regional park trail
site, there is always a possibility of disturbance to unrecorded cultural deposits, especially because of the
presence of a known pre-historic site to the northeast of the project site and the presence of a water
source (Kelly Creek) adjacent to the regional park trail alignment. It is also possible that unknown human
remains could occur on the project site. Further, having notified the Federated Indians of Graton
Rancheria in accordance with AB 52 (refer to Appendix 4.3 of the RDEIR), having followed up with the
request to consult with Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria and having received no response,the City
has determined that with Mitigation Measures RPT CUL-1 a and RPT CUL-1 b, outlined above, that require
avoiding inadvertent impacts to prehistoric resources and human remains, should they be encountered
during construction of the trail, the proposed project would not affect any known or unknown tribal
cultural resources in the area. Therefore, with mitigation the RPT project would result in a is less than
significant impact on archeological resources, unknown human remains, and tribal cultural resources.
4.5 Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1: The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse
effects related to fault rupture but would cause potential substantial adverse effects related to seismic
ground shaking and/or seismic-related ground failure.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-1 b would reduce potential project
adverse effects related to seismic ground shaking and/or seismic-related ground failure to less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-la: The project Applicants shall submit for City's approval a preconstruction design-level
geotechnical report for the Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project component and the
Putnam Park Extension Project component. The report shall include all applicable
geologic report standards, reconnaissance and subsurface exploration data, laboratory
test results, and conclusions and recommendations, including, but not limited to, those
pertaining to: 1) site preparation, excavation, fill placement and compaction,
temporary and permanent cut and fill slope inclinations (including whether slopes
steeper than 3:1 can be used at the site), slope stability, slope erosion mitigation, and
landslide movement mitigation; 2) surface and subsurface drainage systems, including
drainage associated with grading for landslide movement mitigation and new cut and
fill slopes; 3) foundations and floors for planned residential structures; 4) foundations for
planned site improvements, including, but not limited to restrooms, barn, pedestrian
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 38
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
bridges, and other structures; 5) settlement and swell estimates for planned residential
structures and site improvements, including those bearing of engineered fill; 6)
foundations, back-drains, and lateral earth pressures for site retaining walls; 7) seismic
design parameters for the planned residential structures, site improvements, and site
retaining walls; 8) pavement design for driveways, parking lots, pathways and trails,
where applicable; 9) utility trench backfill, including check dams and trench drainage,
if appropriate; 10) geologic/geotechnical construction monitoring, testing, and
certification requirements; and 1 1) loop trail construction and long-term maintenance
requirements, including criteria for inspecting and maintaining pedestrian bridges,
culverts, and pathway surfaces, as appropriate.
The geotechnical report shall include measures, as necessary, to reduce the potential
for static and earthquake-induced slope movements that may adversely impact the
Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project
component including areas currently underlain by mapped landslides. Engineering
analyses shall estimate the factors of safety against slope movements within the planned
development area and estimates of the magnitude and location of earthquake-
induced slope deformation.
GEO-1 b: As determined by the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official, all recommendations
outlined in the preconstruction design-level geotechnical report for the Davidon (28-Lot)
Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project component, as
described under Mitigation Measure GEO-1 a, are herein incorporated by reference and
shall be adhered to in order to ensure that appropriate measures are incorporated into
the design and construction of the project. Nothing in this mitigation measure shall
preclude the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official from requiring additional
information be provided to determine compliance with applicable standards. The
project geotechnical engineer shall review the project plans and specifications and
submit a letter certifying to the City that the project plans and specifications have been
prepared in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations for the project. The
project geotechnical engineer or personnel under their direct supervision shall inspect
the construction of geotechnical and/or geologic aspects of the project and shall
submit a letter certifying to the City that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy,
the geotechnical and geologic aspects of the project plans and specifications have
been appropriately constructed at the site and are acceptable to the project
geotechnical engineer.
Finding for Impact GEO-1: Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-1 b would reduce project impacts to
less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-
1 b will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact GEO-1 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Due to the project site's proximity to the Rodgers Creek fault which is located
approximately 6.5 miles northeast of the site, the project would likely experience strong ground shaking
during a seismic event, which could affect the proposed residences and structures onsite and result in
seismically-induced landslides and ground movement in areas of moderate to steep slopes underlain by
thick soils, weak or fractured rock, or loose fill. State building codes require that structures be designed to
resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by wind and earthquakes. The proposed project would
comply with building requirements set forth by the State, which have been designed to reduce the
likelihood of damage as a result of ground shaking. In addition, Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-
1 b, which require the preparation of a project-specific geotechnical report and the implementation of
recommendations identified in the report in relation to seismic ground shaking and associated ground
failure would reduce the potential for structures on the project site to sustain damage during an
earthquake event. With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-1 b, the potential for
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 39
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
seismically induced landslides and fill slope movements associated with the proposed project would be
less than significant.
Impact GEO-2:The proposed project would result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
However,implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-2a and GEO-2b and HYD-3 (listed under Hydrology
and Water Quality, below) would reduce proposed project adverse effects related to substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-2a: The preconstruction design level geotechnical report, identified in Mitigation Measure
GEO-1, shall include specific recommendations to mitigate surface erosion. The project
geotechnical engineer or personnel under their direct supervision shall inspect the
construction of geotechnical and/or geologic aspects of fill placement and compaction
and surface drainage systems of cut and fill slopes to ensure that the geotechnical
recommendations associated with mitigating surface soil erosion are properly
implemented during construction. At a minimum, 1) slope inclinations shall be no steeper
than 3:1 (horizontal to vertical), unless the project engineering geologist specifically
indicates that a steeper slope would perform satisfactorily over the long term, 2) fill slope
requirements shall include a process of overbuilding the fill on the slope and shaving it
back to expose a well compacted fill surface that is less susceptible to surface erosion,
and 3) the project civil engineer shall check the final grading of the site and the elevations
of the surface drainage systems to confirm that the grading contractor graded the site
and constructed surface improvement in accordance with the approved grading plans.
GEO-2b: The project geotechnical engineer shall review the geotechnical aspects of the SWPPP
and, where applicable, shall provide comments to the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD)
to ensure that the geotechnical recommendations associated with mitigating surface soil
erosion through BMPs and a long-term monitoring and maintenance program of the
planned cut and fill slopes are properly incorporated into the SWPPP and/or a project
specific operations and maintenance plan. As a minimum, the geotechnical aspects of
the SWPPP shall include a requirement to check the condition of the slope at the beginning
of the first rainy season after the completion of grading and periodic inspections until
surface vegetation has been fully established on the exposed slopes.
Finding for Impact GEO-2: Mitigation Measures GEO-2a and GEO-2b along with HYD-3 would reduce
project impacts to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures
GEO-2a and GEO-2b along with HYD-1 a - HYD-1 d, and HYD-3 will be incorporated into Project via
conditions of approval and will reduce Impact GEO-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The residential project component would require grading and earthwork leaving
bare earth that could result in soil erosion and loss of topsoil on the project site. Mitigation Measures GEO-
2a and GEO-2b would address erosion impacts during construction that are related to geotechnical
aspects of the project, and would reduce the impact associated with erosion of poorly compacted soil
by ensuring that geotechnical recommendations associated with mitigating surface soil erosion are
properly implemented during construction.
Stormwater runoff from the proposed trails could result in soil erosion and discharge of sediment into Kelly
Creek. Mitigation Measures GEO-2a GEO-2b would ensure that the geotechnical recommendations
associated with mitigating surface soil erosion through BMPs and a maintenance program of the planned
cut and fill slopes are properly incorporated into the SWPPP and/or a project specific operations and
maintenance plan.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 40
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
There are existing areas of ongoing erosion along the incised channels of Kelly Creek and along the
central and stock pond drainages. Mitigation Measures HYD-1 a - HYD-1 d, and HYD-3 would address this
impact by guiding the design of stormwater outfalls and by incorporating geomorphic erosion mitigation
techniques, such as planting native vegetation, repairing overly steep head cuts, modifying grades, and
repairing bank instability to reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-2a and GEO-2b, along with HYD-1 a-HYD-1 d, and
HYD-3 project impacts associated with erosion during construction and operation would be reduced to
less than significant levels.
Impact GEO-3: The proposed project would expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects
from landslides and unstable slopes.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-3b reduce proposed project adverse
effects from landslides and unstable slopes to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-3a Landslide Remediation
Where landslide mitigation is required under Mitigation Measure GEO-la, the project
geotechnical engineer or personnel under their direct supervision shall inspect the
excavation and grading associated with the landslide removal and/or stabilization work
to ensure that the geotechnical recommendations associated with mitigating landslide
hazards are properly implemented during construction.
The project geotechnical engineer shall evaluate Landslides B, G, H, L, N. O, and R, which
have a potential to adversely impact the foundations of footbridges and/or the loop trail
pavement. As a minimum, the project geotechnical engineer shall establish an inspection
and maintenance program to ensure that any damage to the planned footbridge
foundations and loop trail improvements due to landslide movements are identified and
repaired.
GEO-3b Cut and Fill Slopes
The project geotechnical engineer, project engineering geologist,or personnel under their
direct supervision shall inspect all cut slopes focusing on evidence of potential instability. If
areas of adverse bedrock structure are encountered, then the project geotechnical
engineer and/or project engineering geologist shall develop remedial measures for these
slopes and the grading contractor shall implement the remedial activity, under the
direction and supervision of project geotechnical engineer and/or engineering geologist,
and acceptable by the City engineer.
Finding for Impact GEO-3: Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-3b would reduce project impacts to
less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-
3b will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact GEO-3 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding:The proposed residential project avoids cut slopes on areas with identified landslides
and minimizes grading onsite by limiting the area of disturbance to 11.2 acres. Due to the nature of the
underlying bedrock, localized areas of adverse bedrock structure or other zones of geologic weakness
could be exposed during grading of cut slopes, any adverse bedding which is uncovered during grading
would increase the potential for landslides. In addition, cut and fill slopes, if not properly designed and
constructed could also result in slope instability. Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-1 b, identified
above, would require the preparation and implementation of the recommendations of an updated
geotechnical report that would address project impact associated with landslides and cut and fill slopes.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 41
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
In addition, Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-3b, would require specific analysis and monitoring of
measures to address the impacts related to the landslides at the project site. With implementation of
Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-3b, the impacts from landslides and slope instability would be
reduced to less than significant.
Impact GEO-4: The proposed project would be located on a geologic unit that could become unstable
as a result of the project, and on expansive soils creating direct or indirect risk to life or property.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-4a and GEO-4b would reduce proposed project
adverse effects related to expansive soils to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-4a A preconstruction geotechnical report shall be prepared for the Davidon (28-Lot)
Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project component, as
previously discussed in Mitigation Measure GEO-1 a. Specific to site geology, bedrock
shear, settlement, and expansive soil, the project geotechnical engineer shall confirm that
the conclusions and all applicable recommendations previously presented in the 2015
design-level geotechnical report are still applicable for the design and construction of the
Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project
component.
GEO-4b As a minimum, cut lots that have subgrades exposing bedrock shall be over-excavated
and recompacted to a minimum depth of three feet, and backfilled as described below,
unless the project geotechnical engineer provides project specific alternative
recommendations to mitigate the potential for differential settlement associated with
variable settlement and swell behavior between bedrock and compacted engineered fill.
The exposed surface shall be scarified to a depth of about 12 inches, moisture-conditioned
to not less than three percent over optimum moisture content and compacted to at least
90 percent relative compaction.
Excavation deeper than the above recommendations may be required to expose
competent material under conditions where soft or saturated soil is encountered. The
excavation depth will be determined in the field as part of the geotechnical analysis
required under Mitigation Measure GEO-Ia.
Project site grades shall be designed to slope away from the proposed structures, and
water from roof drains shall be directed to suitable outlets. Fill slopes comprised of low to
moderately expansive soil shall be evaluated for stability (see Mitigation Measures GEO-
la and GEO-3a). Additional mitigations to reduce the impact of expansive soils on the
proposed residences shall include:
a. Moisture conditioning and re-compacting low to moderately expansive soil.
b. Placing non-expansive fill beneath the homes and rigid surface improvements.
c. Designing foundations to resist or tolerate differential movement of moderately
expansive soil.
Finding for Impact GEO-4: Mitigation Measures GEO-4a and GEO-4b would reduce project impacts to
less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures GEO-4a and GEO-
4b will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact GEO-4 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Fill and bedrock materials have different expansion and settlement potentials.
Therefore, structures and foundations constructed across the transition line between cut and fill could
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 42
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
experience significant differential expansion and/or settlement on the project site. Cracked or damaged
foundations could pose a danger to the structures or future occupants on the project site, resulting in a
potentially significant impact. However, implantation Mitigation Measures GEO-4a and GEO-4b reduce
potentially significant impacts associated with bedrock shear zones and settlement to a less than
significant level.
Impact GEO-6: The proposed project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic features.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-6a through GEO-6c would reduce proposed
project adverse effects related to expansive soils to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-6a The project Applicants shall identify a qualified paleontologist prior to any demolition,
excavation, or construction. The City shall approve the selected project paleontologist
prior to issuance of the demolition permit. The paleontologist shall attend the pre-grading
meeting to inform the contractor(s) how to recognize paleontological resources in the soil
during grading activities.The prime construction contractor and any subcontractor(s) shall
be informed on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying
paleontological resources or removing paleontological resources from the project site.
GEO-6b If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of site development
activities, work in that area shall be halted and the selected project paleontologist, as
outlined in Mitigation Measure GEO-6a above, shall be notified of the find to determine
the significance of the find and to recommend appropriate mitigation measures.
Recommendations shall be presented for City approval in a Treatment and Recovery Plan.
The selected project paleontologist shall have the authority to temporarily divert or redirect
grading to allow time to evaluate any exposed fossil material.
GEO-6c If the selected project paleontologist determines that the resource is significant, then any
scientifically significant specimens shall be properly collected by the project
paleontologist. During collecting activities, contextual stratigraphic data shall also be
collected. The data will include lithologic descriptions, photographs, measured
stratigraphic sections, and field notes.
Scientifically significant specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification (not
exhibition), stabilized, identified, and offered for curation to a suitable repository that has
a retrievable storage system, such as the University of California, Berkeley, Museum of
Paleontology.
The selected project paleontologist shall prepare a final report at the end of the earth-
moving activities. The report shall include an itemized inventory of recovered fossils and
appropriate stratigraphic and locality data. The project paleontologist shall send one
copy of the report to the City of Petaluma Community Development Department; another
copy should accompany any fossils, along with field logs and photographs, to the
designated repository.
Findinq for Impact GEO-6: Mitigation Measures GEO-6a through GEO-6c would reduce project impacts
to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measures GEO-6a through
GEO-6c will be incorporated into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact GEO-6 to a
less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: It is possible that undiscovered paleontological resources could be present on the
project site and without proper care during the grading and excavation phases these resources could
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 43
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
be damaged or destroyed. However, implantation of Mitigation Measures GEO-6a through GEO-6c
would reduce potential impact to paleontological resources to a less than significant level.
RPT Impact GEO-1: The implementation of the proposed RTP project could directly or indirectly cause
substantial adverse effects related to landslides and cut slopes; however, it would not result in substantial
adverse effects related to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, or existing
geologic conditions. Regional park trail project implementation would also not result in substantial soil
erosion or have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-1 would reduce RPT project adverse effects
related to landslides and cut slopes to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
RPT GEO-1 To reduce the potential risks of regional park trail damage as a result of earthquake-
induced landslide movement, the project geotechnical engineer shall develop and
submit to the Sonoma County a long-term maintenance plan, including criteria for
inspecting and maintaining the planned regional park trail improvements.
Finding for Impact RPT GEO-1: Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-1 would reduce project impacts to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-1 will be incorporated
into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact RPT GEO-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Although the proposed regional park trail alignment is in an area with known
landslides, the RTP project would not contain permanent residences or any structures. Additionally, if the
regional park trail becomes damaged and inaccessible to pedestrians, the risk of injury would persist
unless the regional park trail is closed to the public and/or until the regional park trail is repaired and
accessibility is restored. Mitigation Measure RPT-GEO-1 requires periodic inspection and repair of the
regional park trail to reduce impacts associated with landslide movement. With implementation of
Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-1, the potential impacts associated with regional park trail damage from
earthquake-induced landslides would be less than significant.
RPT Impact GEO-2: The proposed regional park trail could directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic features.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-2 would reduce potential project adverse
effects related to unknown paleontological resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
RPT GEO-2 If paleontological resources are encountered anywhere in the project site, all work should
be halted in the vicinity and a paleontologist consulted immediately.
Finding for Impact RPT GEO-2: Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-2 would reduce project impacts to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-2 will be incorporated
into Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact RPT GEO-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Although the potential to encounter paleontological resources during construction
of the RPT is low, Mitigation Measure RPT GEO-2 shall be implemented to ensure that impacts to
paleontological resources would be less than significant.
4.6 Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HYD-1:The proposed project would result in the discharge of stormwater that could violate water
quality standards, degrade surface or ground water quality, and cause hydromodification.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 44
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-la through HYD-1d would reduce proposed
project adverse effects on water quality and hydro modification to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
HYD-la: Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the City of Petaluma shall
verify that the Applicants have prepared a SWPPP in accordance with the requirements
of the statewide Construction General Permit.The SWPPP shall be designed to address the
following objectives: (1) all pollutants and their sources, including sources of sediment
associated with construction, construction site erosion, and all other activities associated
with construction activity are controlled; (2) where not otherwise required to be under a
Regional Water Quality Control Board permit, all non-stormwater discharges are identified
and either eliminated, controlled, or treated; (3) site BMPs are effective and result in the
reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-
stormwater discharges from construction activity; and (4) stabilization BMPs are installed to
reduce or eliminate pollutants after construction is completed. The SWPPP shall be
prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer. The SWPPP shall include the minimum BMPs
required for the identified Risk Level. BMP implementation shall be consistent with the BMP
requirements in the most recent version of the California Stormwater Quality Association
Stormwater Best Management Handbook-Construction or the Caltrans Stormwater Quality
Handbook Construction Site BMPs Manual.
HYD-1 b: In areas within 50 feet of sensitive habitat areas, construction activities should be planned
to avoid disturbance of riparian vegetation, including trees and their root systems. The
SWPPP shall specifically address special considerations for controlling sediment and other
pollutants within these areas, through additional erosion control measures (such as berms
and temporary retention/settling basins that divert runoff away from the creek banks,
limiting the use of heavy construction vehicles within the riparian zone, or conserving a nd
replacing topsoil during grading near the riparian zone to speed up the re-establishment
of stabilizing vegetation), to limit grading near riparian areas to occur only during the dry-
season. Erosion control measures shall also include staged grading to reduce the area of
exposed soil at any one period of time, and/or other measures specifically tailored to
riparian and sensitive areas.
HYD-lc: The project shall implement appropriate post-construction stormwater treatment
measures to reduce water quality and hydro modification impacts to downstream
reaches, as required by the current post construction controls requirements of the Small
MS4 General Permit. Upon completion of the final project design, the Applicants shall
provide documentation to the City of stormwater management measures that show
compliance with the Small MS4 General Permit. The report shall delineate individual
drainage management areas (DMAs) within the project site and provide analysis to show
compliance with the volumetric or flow-based treatment criteria as described in the Small
MS4 General Permit and outlined in the 2019 BASMAA (2019) guidance document. The
report shall also include design calculations that show post-project runoff for the 2-year,
24-hour storm event does not exceed pre-project flow for each DMA, and that each DMA
has appropriate stormwater quality treatment based on flow- or volumetric-based
calculation, as outlined in the Small MS4 General Permit and in compliance with the 2019
BASMAA guidance document (2019). The final documentation shall be submitted to the
City for approval before the beginning of grading.
HYD-1 d: The proposed multi-use trails shall be designed to direct stormwater runoff away from Kelly
Creek and D-Street tributary and/or to vegetated pervious areas not susceptible to
erosion. The path shall be designed to limit the amount of runoff concentrated from any
one portion of the path in order to prevent gullying. In areas close to Kelly Creek or
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 45
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
otherwise not suitable for distributed discharge of runoff, stormwater treatment measures
such as swales shall be implemented to protect the creek.
Finding for Impact HYD-1: Mitigation Measures HYD-1 a through HYD-1 d would reduce proposed project
impacts on water quality and hydromodification to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines,the
City finds that Mitigation Measures HYD-1 a through HYD-1 d will be incorporated into the Project via
conditions of approval and will reduce Impact HYD-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Construction activities would increase the potential for on-site erosion, potentially
leading to increased turbidity and sedimentation in Kelly Creek on the project site and in downstream
reaches (including the Petaluma River). Because the project would disturb more than one acre of land,
the Applicants are required to prepare a SWPPP, per NPDES general construction permit requirements
through the SWRCB. The SWPPP would address potential erosion and sedimentation issues through a
project-specific erosion control plan, as well as other BMPs to reduce the potential for spills and other
contamination from on-site construction activities. Proper implementation of the project-specific SWPPP
would reduce the potential construction-related surface-water quality impacts to a less-than-significant
level. However, because a project-specific SWPPP has not been prepared at this time, the potential
remains for project construction runoff to adversely affect surface-water quality and the impact is
considered potentially significant.
In addition, construction of the edges of fill pads for housing, barn stabilization, the multi-use loop trail, as
well as stormwater conveyance, treatment, and detention facilities, may occur in locations adjacent to
Kelly Creek or other areas near sensitive waters or habitat. These areas are more sensitive to construction
activities, and special consideration is needed to limit potential impacts to water bodies and riparian
habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 a and HYD-1 b would reduce project impact during
construction on surface water quality, jurisdictional waters, and riparian areas to a less-than-significant
level.
The proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces within the sub-watershed,
including new roadways, driveways, parking areas, sidewalks, and rooftops. Untreated runoff has the
potential to adversely impact surface water quality in Kelly Creek and downstream water bodies. The
proposed project would be required to comply with the NPDES General Permit for the Discharge of Storm
Water from Small MS4s (SWRCB 2013), which prescribes methods for residential developments to control
and treat stormwater runoff. Therefore, potential impacts from the project would be reduced to less than
significant.
Separate from the direct effects on water quality, increased runoff generated on the project site as a
result of the increase in impervious surfaces would have the potential to result in `hydromodification' in
Kelly Creek and drainages downstream of the project site.The Small MS4 General Permit requires projects
to control for hydromodification effects of impervious areas. In the absence of final design plans which is
required to demonstrate that the post-project runoff does not exceed estimated pre-project flow rates
for the 2-year, 24-hour storm, Mitigation Measure HYD-1 c would reduce the post-construction impact of
the proposed project on surface water quality and potential hydromodification to a less than significant
level.
The proposed project also includes a multi-use trail network that would be surfaced with ADA-compliant
material, such as park tread, asphalt, or decomposed granite.Stormwater runoff from the proposed trails
could result in erosion and discharge of sediment into the creek. Mitigation Measure HYD-1 d is proposed
to address this potentially significant impact, which requires that trail paths be designed to drain runoff
into pervious areas not susceptible to erosion, and would effectively reduce the proposed project's post-
construction impact on surface water quality related to stormwater runoff to a less-than-significant level.
Impact HYD-3: The proposed project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area in a manner that would result in substantial alteration of stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces in a manner that would result in erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 46
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-3 would reduce proposed project adverse effects
related to the alteration of the existing drainage patterns of the project site to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
HYD-3 Stormwater outfalls to Kelly Creek and the D Street tributary shall be designed to reduce
the potential to cause bank instability. Outfall locations near (or especially across from)
existing or potential bank instabilities shall be avoided so that outflows do not exacerbate
erosion. Appropriate energy dissipation, such as boulder aprons, biostabilization, or
directing outfalls in a downstream rather than cross-channel direction, shall be
incorporated to reduce the potential to cause erosion
Finding for Impact HYD-3: Mitigation Measure HYD-3 would reduce proposed project impacts on changes
to the existing drainage patterns to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure HYD-3 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce
Impact HYD-3 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The proposed project would construct up to three stormwater outfalls along Kelly
Creek. High flows from these stormwater outfalls could cause or exacerbate erosion of the banks if
appropriate energy dissipation is not incorporated. Mitigation Measure HYD-3 guides the design of
stormwater outfalls and would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
Impact HYD-4: The proposed project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area in a manner that would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff that would result
in flooding on- or off-site.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-4a through HYD-4c would reduce proposed
project adverse effects related to an increase in surface runoff that could result in flooding on- or off-site
to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
HYD-4a: Prior to final map approval, the Applicants shall submit final detention design that shows
that appropriate controls have been included to ensure that the post-project 10-and 100-
year peak flows will not exceed pre-project peaks. Hydrologic analyses and final detention
designs shall be consistent with the standards outlined in Sonoma Water's Flood
Management Design Manual, adopted May 19, 2020.Total detention volume may be less
than the volume projected in the preliminary hydrologic analysis if final analysis shows
appropriate compliance through integrated LID/water quality treatment/detention
features. Final hydrologic analysis and detention sizing shall include potential increases in
peak flow due to all new impervious surfaces associated with the proposed project,
including the parking areas.
HYD-4b: The project Applicants shall prepare and execute, in coordination with the City Engineer
or other privately funded and operated maintenance mechanism which ensures that
maintenance of all detention facilities will be provided as necessary to continuously
provide the required volume storage in a 10-year storm and in a 100-year storm,
throughout the life of the project, and shall include a financing mechanism acceptable
to the City Engineer to ensure that the required maintenance will be performed.
HYD-4c: The project Applicants shall design, in coordination with the City Engineer, on-site
detention facilities sufficient to detain on-site and release runoff from storm events such
that any runoff temporarily detained on-site is released either before or after the expected
peak flood flow of the Petaluma River and that any release of runoff temporarily detained
on-site does not contribute to an increase in peak flood periods on the Petaluma River.
Prior to final map approval, the project Applicants' final stormwater detention design
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 47
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
calculations shall be subject to review by the City's stormwater consultant and City
Engineer. The project Applicants shall be responsible for funding all costs and providing
the required technical information to the City.
Findinq for Impact HYD-4: Mitigation Measures HYD-4a through HYD-4c would reduce potential project
impacts related to an increase in surface runoff that could result in flooding on- or off-site to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures HYD-4a through HYD-4c
will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact HYD-4 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: Adequate detention capacity can be provided on the project site and flooding
within the Kelly and Thompson Creek system would not occur as a result of the proposed project.
However, the design and configuration of these basins may change during the final design process, and
when integrating stormwater quality treatment measures. Therefore, Mitigation Measure HYD-4a would
guide the design process and ensure that final designs maintain peak flows at or below existing levels. As
such, the proposed project's impact related to altering drainage patterns and flooding is less than
significant.
All treatment and detention facilities would require maintenance for the life of the development project
to remain effective. Mitigation Measure HYD-4b would ensure maintenance of all detention facilities and
reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Detention of stormwater at the project site would tend to delay flows from the site, and potentially cause
peak flows downstream to coincide, resulting in slight increases in peak flow elevations at the Petaluma
River, even though peak flow in Thompson/Kelly Creek would not increase. Mitigation Measure HYD-4c
would guide final detention designs so that peak flows from the project site do not add to the peaks
downstream in the Petaluma River. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce this potential
impact to a less-than-significant level.
Impact HYD-6: The proposed project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area in a manner that would redirect flood flows.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-6 would reduce proposed project adverse effects
related to the alteration of the existing drainage patterns of the project site in a manner that would
redirect flood flows to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
HYD-6 Pedestrian bridges across Kelly Creek shall be designed to fully span the channel in order
to reduce the potential to impede streamflow. If full-span lengths are not feasible, bridge
supports shall be designed to maximize the natural channel cross-section area in order
reduce the potential obstruction to in-stream flow.
Finding for Impact HYD-6: Mitigation Measure HYD-6 would reduce potential project impacts on changes
to the existing drainage patterns to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure HYD-6 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce
Impact HYD-6 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding:The Putnam Park Extension Project component proposes three separate pedestrian
bridges across Kelly Creek. Piers, abutments, or supports for these crossings could impede and or redirect
flood flows within the Kelly Creek corridor. Mitigation Measure HYD-6 would reduce this potential impact
by requiring the design of the pedestrian footbridges to maximize the natural channel cross section and
avoid potential obstruction of in-stream flow. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-6
potential impacts associated with redirecting flood flows would be less than significant.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 48
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
4.7 Noise
Impact NOISE-1: Noise generated by construction activities on the project site would result in a substantial
temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
However,implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 would reduce proposed project adverse effects
to sensitive receptors related to construction noise to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
NOISE-1 The proposed project shall implement the following control measures during construction.
a. Noise-generating construction activities shall be limited to daytime,weekday hours
(7 AM to 6 PM) and 9 AM to 5 PM on weekends and holidays. When construction is
occurring within 100 feet of existing residences, then construction shall occur
between 9 AM and 5 PM and shall be prohibited on Sundays and Holidays.
b. High noise-producing activities, such as excavation and grading and construction
finishing, shall be scheduled between the hours of 8 AM and 5 PM to minimize
disruption on sensitive uses.
c. All stationary noise generating equipment that generates noise levels in excess of
65 dBA Leq shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptors. If re-locating
stationary equipment is not feasible, the equipment shall be shielded from noise
sensitive receptors by using temporary walls,sound curtains,or other similar devices
to reduce noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors to less than 65 dBA Leq.
d. The construction contractor shall implement feasible noise controls to minimize
equipment noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Feasible noise controls
include improved mufflers, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and
acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds.
e. Equipment used for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically
powered impact tools (e.g., jack hammers) wherever possible to avoid noise
associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools.Where
use of pneumatically-powered tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used. A muffler could lower noise levels from the
exhaust by up to about 10 dBA. External jackets on the tools themselves shall be
used where feasible; this could achieve a reduction of five dBA. Quieter
procedures shall be used (such as drilling rather than impact equipment) wherever
feasible.
f. The construction contractor shall implement appropriate additional noise
reduction measures that include shutting off idling equipment after 5 minutes (as
feasible) and notifying adjacent residences (at least one time) in advance of
construction work.
g. The construction contractor shall not stage equipment within 200 feet of the
existing residences adjacent to the project site.
h. The contractor shall minimize use of vehicle backup alarms. A common approach
to minimizing the use of backup alarms is to design the construction site with a
circular flow pattern that minimizes backing up of trucks and other heavy
equipment. Another approach to reducing the intrusion of backup alarms is to
require all equipment on the site to be equipped with ambient sensitive alarms.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 49
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
With this type of alarm, the alarm sound is automatically adjusted based on the
ambient noise.
i. Construction worker's radios shall be controlled so as to be inaudible beyond the
limits of the project site boundaries.
j. Heavy equipment, such as paving and grading equipment, shall be stored on-site
whenever possible to minimize the need for extra heavy truck trips on local streets.
k. Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification in writing must
be provided to residents within 300 feet of the project site, disclosing the
construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would be
occurring throughout the duration of the construction period.
I. The construction contractor shall designate a city-approved "disturbance
coordinator"who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about
construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the
noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that
reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. The
construction contractor shall conspicuously post a telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to
neighbors regarding the construction schedule.
Findinq for Impact NOISE-1: Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 would reduce potential project adverse effects
to sensitive receptors related to construction noise to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines,
the City finds that Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of
approval and will reduce Impact NOISE-1 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The temporary or periodic increases in noise that would result when grading or
construction activities occur near the northern, eastern and northwestern portions of the site would be
significant.As a result of the stay-at-home guidelines due to the COVID pandemic, a major portion of the
work force has been working from home; therefore, under these conditions, noise resulting from
construction activities would more adversely affect the nearby sensitive receptors, albeit on a temporary
and periodic bases when construction activities are occurring proximate to existing sensitive receptors.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 project impacts associated with construction
activities would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Impact NOISE-2: Construction of the proposed project would result in the generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-2a and Noise-216 would reduce potential project
adverse effects related to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels during
construction operations to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
NOISE-2a: Heavy construction equipment shall be prohibited from operating within 100 feet of an
existing residence between the hours of 5:00 PM and 9:00 AM and on holidays.
NOISE-2b: Operation of heavy equipment shall be prohibited within 20 feet of the barn complex.
Temporary reinforcements/stabilization measures shall be installed at the barn structures,
as needed, to minimize vibration damage.
Findinq for Impact NOISE-2: Mitigation Measures NOISE-2a and NOISE-2b reduce proposed project
adverse effects related to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels during
construction operations to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 50
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Measures NOISE-2a and NOISE -2b will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and
will reduce Impact NOISE-2 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: In the event that heavy duty equipment were to operate in close proximity to
existing sensitive receptors, groundborne vibration may be perceptible and could result in disturbance to
occupants, particularly during the quieter hours early in the morning and evening. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure NOISE-2a would reduce this impact to less than significant.
Considering the age of the barn complex (late 19th and early 20th century) and the conditions of the
foundation and the overall structure that may require stabilization, the use of vibratory rollers near the
barn complex would have the potential to result in vibrations that could cause some architectural
damage. This would be a significant impact. To minimize vibration impacts on the barn complex, the
proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-2b. With implementation of Mitigation
Measure NOISE-2b, the project's impact related to vibration would be less than significant.
4.8 Transportation and Traffic
Impact TRANS-5: The proposed project would cause temporary disruption to the transportation network
due to construction.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 would reduce proposed project adverse
effects related to construction traffic to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
TRANS-5 A construction management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City
of Petaluma Public Works Department. The plan shall include at least the following items:
a) Development of a construction truck route that would appear on all construction plans
to limit truck and auto traffic on nearby streets.
b) Comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck trips and
deliveries to avoid peak traffic hours, detour signs if required, lane closure procedures
if required, sidewalk closure procedures if required, cones for drivers, and designated
construction access routes.
c) Evaluation of the need to provide flaggers or temporary traffic control at key
intersections along the truck route(s).
d) Notification procedures for adjacent property owners and public safety personnel
regarding schedules when major deliveries, detours, and lane closures would occur.
e) Location of construction staging areas for materials, equipment, and vehicles if there
is insufficient staging area within the work zone of the proposed project.
f) Identification of truck routes for movement of construction vehicles that would
minimize impacts on vehicular and pedestrian traffic, circulation and safety; provision
for monitoring surface streets used for truck movement so that any damage and debris
attributable to the proposed project's construction trucks can be identified and
corrected by the proposed project applicant.
g) A process for responding to and tracking complaints pertaining to construction
activity, including identification of an on-site complaint manager.
h) Documentation of road pavement conditions for all routes that would be used by
construction vehicles both before and after proposed project construction. Roads
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 51
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
found to have been damaged by construction vehicles shall be repaired to the level
at which they existed prior to construction of the proposed project.
Finding for Impact TRANS-5: Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 would reduce proposed project adverse effects
related to construction activities to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that
Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will
reduce Impact TRANS-5 to a less-than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: During construction of the residences and the park extension, additional heavy
vehicle traffic would be added to the street network in the vicinity of the project site, and the proposed
project would have the potential to result in potentially significant temporary impacts on the
transportation network during construction, such as the effect of slow moving trucks and lane closures on
disrupting emergency access or accessibility for people traveling on the surrounding roadway network,
or damage to road pavement from truck movement. Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 would reduce this
potentially significant impact to a less than significant level.
4.9 Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTL-3: Development of the proposed project would require the construction of new or expanded
wastewater conveyance systems. The construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance
systems would result in significant environmental effects.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures UTL-3a and UTL-3b would reduce proposed project
adverse effects related to the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems to less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
UTL-3a Prior to issuance of building permits, the project shall be required to upsize the D Street
sewer between Grossland Way to the manhole west of loth Street, subject to the review
and approval by the City Public Works and Utilities Department.
UTL-3b Mitigation Measure AIR-2, Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through 2c, Mitigation Measure
CUL-3, and Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 and NOISE-2a shall be implemented in
conjunction with the sewer main upgrade project.
Finding for Impact UTL-3: Mitigation Measures UTL-3a and UTL-3b would reduce proposed project adverse
effects related to the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems to less than
significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures UTL-3a and UTL-3b will be
incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact UTL-3 to a less-than-
significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The upsizing of the sewer main on D Street between Grossland Way and the
manhole west of loth Street, could result in air pollutant emissions, noise and vibration, and inadvertent
impacts to previously unknown cultural resources that might be present. Implementation of mitigation
measures during the sewer main upsizing would avoid or reduce potential air quality impacts, cultural
resource impacts, and noise and vibration impacts to less than significant.
Impact UTL-4: Development of the proposed project would require the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities on site.The construction of new storm water drainage facilities could result in significant
environmental effects.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-lc and HYD-4a through 4c (listed above) would
reduce the potential project's impact related to storm water drainage facilities to a less-than-significant
level.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 52
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Findinq for Impact UTL-4: Mitigation Measures HYD-1 c and HYD-4a through 4c (listed above) would reduce
the potential project's impact related to storm water drainage facilities to a less-than-significant level.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures HYD-1 c and HYD-4a through 4c will
be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact UTL-4 to a less-than-
significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The environmental effects from the construction of on-site storm water drainage
facilities are evaluated throughout the RIDER, and to the extent that there would be significant impacts
on biological resources,cultural resources,air quality and noise from construction of storm water drainage
facilities, those impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with the mitigation measures.
4.10 Wildfire
Impact WDF-4: The proposed project would expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslide, as a result of landslide, runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes.
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a, GEO-3a, GEO-3b, HYD-4a, HYD-4b, and HYD-
6 (listed above) would reduce the potential project's impact related the exposure of people or structures
to significant risks,including downslope or downstream flooding or landslide, as a result of landslide,runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes to a less-than-significant level.
Findinq for Impact WDF-4: Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a, GEO-3a, GEO-3b, HYD-4a, HYD-4b, and HYD-6
(listed above) would reduce the potential project's impact related the exposure of people or structures
to significant risks,including downslope or downstream flooding or landslide,as a result of landslide,runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a, GEO-3a, GEO-3b, HYD-4a, HYD-4b, and HYD-
6 will be incorporated into the Project via conditions of approval and will reduce Impact WDF-4 to a less-
than-significant level.
Rationale for Finding: The residential project footprint avoids overlap with identified landslides onsite and
limits ground disturbance to 11.2 acres of the site. As discussed in RIDER Section 4.6, Geology and Soils,
risks associated with potential destabilization of existing landslides would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a and GEO-1 b, which would require
the preparation and implementation of the recommendations of a preconstruction to address landslides
and landslide movement.Mitigation Measures GEO-3a and GEO-3b,which would require the preparation
of project specific design-level recommendations for geotechnical treatment where foundations of the
proposed footbridges and the loop trail overlap with Landslides. The provisions outlined in Mitigation
Measures GEO-1 a, GEO-1 b, GEO-3a, and GEO-3b would reduce the impact associated with landslide
movement as a result of soil instability post-fire to a less-than-significant level.
As described in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would not alter drainage
patterns. Mitigation Measure HYD-4a and Mitigation Measure HYD-4b were identified to ensure that final
project designs maintain peak flows at or below existing conditions and ensure continuous maintenance
of the proposed water detention facilities.
As described under Impact HYD-6 in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, to reduce the potential
impact of the proposed three pedestrian bridges to impede and or redirect flood flows within the Kelly
Creek corridor, Mitigation Measure HYD-6 would require designing the pedestrian footbridges to maximize
the natural channel cross section and reduce potential obstruction of in-stream flow.
Therefore, with incorporation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 a, GEO-1 b, GEO-3a, GEO-3b, HYD-4a, HYD-
4b, and HYD-6, the potential risk to expose people or structures to landslide, slope instability, flooding, or
drainage changes would be less than significant.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 53
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
SECTION 5: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The Final EIR identifies two impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level even though
the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and adopted as part of the
Project.The significant and unavoidable impacts (one project-related and one cumulative) are discussed
below.
Impact TRANS-1: Development of the proposed project would generate VMT per capita greater than the
project threshold.
Findinq for Impact TRANS-1: As discussed in the FEIR, Section 3 in Master Response 10 - VMT Mitigation,
changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project which will lessen, but not
avoid, the significant effect identified in the RDEIR, including new sidewalks, and crosswalks to improve
pedestrian access along Windsor Drive, a new roundabout, crosswalks, and new sidewalks, trails, and
pathways would enhance access to the park via D Street, and to the future Petaluma Ring Trail. However,
specific economic, social, technological, and other considerations addressed in FEIR, Section 3 in Master
Response 10-VMT, and incorporated herein as rationale for this finding, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives to reduce Impact TRANS-1 to a less than significant level.
Rationale for Findinq:There are no feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce project-level
VMT impacts to less than significant. Other potentially effective on-site VMT measures, such as increasing
the density, affordability, or providing access to e-bikes or bike share facilities would not result in a
quantifiable reduction of project-generated VMT given the project site's location within the regional
context and at the edge of City limits, the project site's land use designation and zoning provisions, and
the supportive (non-quantifiable) nature of e-bike amenities and bike share facilities. Potentially effective
offsite VMT measures were also investigated, including sidewalk gap closures, expanding transit service
elsewhere in the City, expanding the pilot bikeshare program, subsidizing transit passes and constructing
other bike facilities, and were determined to be infeasible given offsite constraints, insufficient right-of-
way, lack of engineered design, outside agency approval, and administrative demands associated with
managing such a program.
As discussed in the FEIR in Chapter 5 (corrections to RDEIR pages 4.13.50) and as incorporated herein,
based on research documented in California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2021,
transportation demand management (TDM) strategies would be insufficient for mitigating the project's
VMT due to the project's location on the urban fringe of Petaluma since traditional TDM strategies are
dependent on the land use context and final building occupants who choose to be located in walkable
or transit-supportive locations, lack of design or plans in place to implement offsite measures, timing for
implementation, lack of citywide administrative plan for oversight, and uncertainties related to outside
agency approval requirements. Further, based on the updated CAPCOA 2021 guidance on quantifying
VMT reductions from TDM strategies,the effectiveness of TDM mitigation measures would not fully mitigate
the project's VMT impacts.
As such, there are no additional feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce project-level
VMT impacts to less than significant.
The above Findings are made in conjunction with a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is
simultaneously being adopted for the Project (see Section 7).
Cumulative Impact TRANS-1: Development of the proposed project and the regional park trail would
generate VMT per capita greater than the project threshold under cumulative conditions.
Finding for Impact TRANS-1:As discussed in the FEIR,Section 3 in Master Response 10-VMT Mitigation and
incorporated herein, changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project which
will lessen, but not avoid, the significant effect identified in the RDEIR, including new sidewalks, and
crosswalks to improve pedestrian access along Windsor Drive, a new roundabout, crosswalks, and new
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 54
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
sidewalks,trails,and pathways would enhance access to the park via D Street,and to the future Petaluma
Ring Trail. However, specific economic, social,technological, and other considerations addressed in FEIR,
Section 3 in Master Response 10-VMT,and incorporated herein as rationale for this finding, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives to reduce the Impact TRANS-1 to below significant.
Rationale for Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce cumulative
level VMT impacts to less than significant. Other potentially effective on-site VMT measures, such as
increasing the density, affordability, or providing access to e-bikes or bike share facilities,would not result
in a quantifiable reduction of project-generated VMT given the project site's location within the regional
context and at the edge of City limits, the project site's land use designation and zoning provisions, and
the supportive nature of e-bike amenities and bike share facilities. Potentially effective offsite VMT
measures were also investigated, including sidewalk gap closures, expanding transit service elsewhere in
the City, expanding the pilot bikeshare program, subsidizing transit passes and constructing other bike
facilities, and were determined to be infeasible given offsite constraints, insufficient right-of-way, lack of
engineered design, outside agency approval, and administrative demands associated with managing
such a program.
As discussed, in the FEIR in Chapter 5 (corrections to RDEIR pages 4.13-66) and incorporated herein, based
on research documented in CAPCOA 2021, TDM strategies would be insufficient for mitigating the
project's VMT due to the project's location on the urban fringe of Petaluma since traditional TDM
strategies are dependent on the land use context and final building occupants who choose to be
located in walkable or transit-supportive locations, lack of design or plans in place to implement offsite
measures, timing for implementation, lack of citywide administrative plan for oversight, and uncertainties
related to outside agency approval requirements. Further, based on the updated CAPCOA 2021
guidance on quantifying VMT reductions from TDM strategies, the effectiveness of TDM mitigation
measures would not fully mitigate the project's cumulative VMT impacts.
As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures identified that would reduce cumulative VMT impacts
to less than significant.
The above Findings are made in conjunction with a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is
simultaneously being adopted for the Project (see Section 7).
SECTION 6: FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
6.1 Project Alternatives
As noted in Section 1.2, Project History, in 2004, the project applicant for Davidon Homes put forth a
Vesting Tentative Map for a residential development project to subdivide the 58.66-acre project site into
93 single-family residential lots. A Draft EIR was published in February of 2013 that analyzed the then
proposed 93 lot subdivision, and presented a range of alternatives including a reduced density project
alternative. In response to the comments received on the 2013 DEIR, the project applicant for Davidon
Homes put forth a reduced development proposal of 66 single-family homes at the project site, which
was analyzed in a new Draft EIR released for public review in 2017 and presented a range of alternatives,
including a reduced project alternative.
The Scott Ranch Project, as currently proposed and analyzed in this FEIR is a variation on the reduced
project alternative identified in the prior Draft EIRs. The Scott Ranch Project consists of a 28 lot residential
subdivision on 11.2 acres including 5 acres of private open space as proposed by Davidon Homes, and
a 47 acre extension of Helen Putnam Park balance of the project site, as proposed by Kelly Creek
Protection Project (KCPP) of Earth Island Institute KCPP.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 55
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
As presented in the RDEIR Section 5.4 Alternatives Considered But Not Evaluated provides a summary of
the various alternatives that were considered by found to be infeasible including an increased housing
density alternatives, a reduced project alternative, and an off-site alternative.
The Final EIR included three alternatives:the No Project/No Development;the Davidon (28-Lot) Residential
Project Alternative, and the Putnam Park Extension Project Alternative. The City hereby concludes that
the Final EIR and prior Draft EIRs sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the Scott Ranch Project
so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision making. The City finds that the three
alternatives identified and described in the Final EIR were considered and finds them to be infeasible for
the specific economic,social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources
Code section 21081.
6.1.1 Objectives of the Proposed Project
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an environmental impact report (EIR)
include a statement of the objectives sought by a proposed project (Section 15124(b) of the State CEQA
Guidelines).
The City of Petaluma has developed the following primary objectives for the proposed project:
• provide development consistent with the City's long-term development goals, especially as
related to the provision of additional housing;
• develop the project site in a manner that preserves the uniqueness and gateway value of the
site;
• implement General Plan policies related to establishment of an Urban Separator and the
Petaluma ring trail system; and
• provide improved recreational access to the Helen Putnam Regional Park.
The project applicants' key objectives for the proposed project are to:
• promote and maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary thereby
discouraging urban sprawl;
• develop a high-quality residential project on the west side of Petaluma, compatible with existing
residential subdivisions in the neighborhood and with rural and park areas to the south and west
of the site;
• permanently preserve sensitive biological and geological areas of the site as protected open
space;
• preserve and enhance Kelly Creek in its natural state;
• preserve the barn complex;
• provide a public pedestrian/bicycle trail connecting to Helen Putnam Regional Park; and
• provide a large extension of the Helen Putnam Regional Park, incorporating new trails, a restored
barn complex, habitat and waterway enhancements, and related features.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 56
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
6.1.2 No Project/ No Development Alternative
The State CEQA Guidelines require the analysis of a No Project Alternative (Section 15125.6(e)). This
analysis must discuss existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the
foreseeable future if the project were not to be approved, based on current plans, site zoning, and
consistent with available infrastructure and community services.The purpose of describing and analyzing
a No Project Alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed
project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project.
The project site is currently zoned Residential 1 (R1) on the City's Zoning Map and designated Very Low
Density Residential (0.6 to 2.5 dwelling units per acre) in the City's General Plan. Given the project site
zoning and General Plan designation, if the proposed project were not to be approved, the site could
still be developed with 28-113 single-family homes2 without requiring a General Plan amendment or
rezoning. Such a No Project Alternative could result in the development of a subdivision that is
comparable to or even larger than the proposed project. Prior DEIRs prepared for the project included
an analysis of a 93 and a 66 unit subdivision, and therefore, such a No Project Alternative was not
evaluated in the RDEIR. Instead, the No Project Alternative analyzed is the No Development Alternative,
under which no alterations would be made to the project site, the existing barn complex and mobile
home would remain in place, and the site would continue to be used as grazing land.
The No Project/No Development Alternative is rejected-for any and all of the following reasons:
• The No Project Alternative would not realize any of the City of Petaluma's Project Objectives because
it would not provide development consistent with the City's long-term development goals, especially
as related to the provision of additional housing or develop the project site in a manner that preserves
the uniqueness and gateway value of the site. In addition, it would not implement General Plan
policies related to the site's land use and zoning provisions, establishment of an Urban Separator, and
the Petaluma ring trail system,or provide improved recreational access to the Helen Putnam Regional
Park.
• The No Project Alternative would not realize any of the Project Applicant's Project Objectives because
it would not maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary, develop a
compatible, high-quality residential project on the west side of Petaluma, permanently preserve
sensitive biological and geological areas of the site as protected open space, nor would it enhance
Kelly Creek or preserve the barn complex. Further, a public pedestrian/bicycle trail connecting to
Helen Putnam Regional Park would not be provided and Helen Putnam Regional Park would not be
extending, incorporating new trails, habitat and waterway enhancements, and related features.
6.1.3 Davidon (28 Lot) Residential Project Alternative
The Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project Alternative would develop 28 single-family homes in the same lot
configuration as the proposed project. Development of this alternative would be on approximately 1 1.2
acres of the project site, north of Kelly Creek, with 6.4 acres for the residences and approximately 5 acres
of private open space. This alternative would not include the Putnam Park Extension Project component
and would be limited to the 28 lot residential subdivision and associated improvements. Under this
alternative, the multi-use trails and pedestrian and livestock bridges would not be developed, the barn
complex would remain in place and would not be restored, and there would be no pasture
improvements or stock pond enhancements. As with the proposed project, this alternative would
construct the roundabout at D Street and Windsor Drive and the detention and infiltration facility located
south of Windsor Drive. It would also include a new off-site sidewalk improvement along the east side of
D Street between Windsor Drive and Sunnyslope Avenue, for a distance of approximately 800 feet, to
z The net acreage of the site is 45.27 acres(excludes public or private rights-of-way,public open space and floodways,but
does not exclude the Urban Separator per Policy 1-P-19).As such,the number of units allowed to be developed on the
project site ranges between 28 and-113 dwelling units.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 57
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
connect with the existing sidewalk. Storm drains would be installed in the new streets that serve the
proposed residences to collect the runoff generated by new impervious surfaces. Collected storm water
would be detained and infiltrated onsite before eventual discharge into Kelly Creek via a new outfall. A
detention and infiltration facility would be constructed south of Windsor Drive. Another detention and
infiltration basin would be installed at the southwest corner of Windsor Drive and D Street to capture
existing, untreated runoff from Windsor Drive.The runoff would be intercepted on Windsor Drive in a newly
constructed drop inlet and flow into a vegetated swale leading to the proposed infiltration basin.
With the exception of similar significant and unavoidable VMT traffic impacts, the Davidon (28-Lot)
Residential Project Alternative would reduce all other impacts of the proposed project, because it would
not develop the Putnam Park Extension Project component. This alternative would achieve the project
objective of promoting development within the established urban growth boundary, thereby
discouraging urban sprawl. It would also achieve the objectives of developing a high-quality residential
project on the west side of Petaluma, preservation of Kelly Creek in its natural state, and providing new
housing opportunities while minimizing neighborhood impacts.
The Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project Alternative is rejected for any and all of the following reasons:
• Not all project objectives would be achieved
• VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable and other environmental impacts
identified would not be substantially reduced
• Permanently preserving sensitive biological and geological areas of the site as protected open
space would not be realized
• Restoration of the riparian corridor, enhancement to stockpond, gully repair, and public park uses
on more than 3 acres would not occur
• Untreated runoff from Windsor Drive would continue to drain to Kelly Creek
6.1.4 Putnam Park Extension Project Alternative
The Putnam Park Extension Project Alternative would only include the features of the Putnam Park
Extension Project component and no residential subdivision would be developed. The Putnam Park
Extension Project Alternative Site Plan would construct multi-use trails and the upper and main parking
lots.As with the proposed project alternative,the barn complex under this alternative would be preserved
and may be relocated for purposes of stabilization and preservation, and pathways between the
structures (surfaced with ADA-compliant material), bike parking, information kiosks, vegetable gardens,
demonstration and working corrals, antique farm equipment with a hand pump, and an amphitheater
for outdoor learning activities would be established. Under this alternative, like the proposed project, a
playground and picnic areas would be constructed south of Kelly Creek. This alternative would also
include a multi-use loop trail circling the north and potentially south side of Kelly Creek. A short trail from
the loop trail that connects to the upper parking lot would also be installed. A trail would be constructed
parallel to D Street that travels northerly through the park, along the west side of the main parking lot,
through a proposed playground area, over a footbridge crossing Kelly Creek, and through the barn
center. As with the proposed project, this alternative would include pasture improvements, stock pond
enhancements, and features to protect and conserve habitat for the California red-legged frog. A
stormwater treatment facility may be required to treat runoff from the proposed main parking lot (south
of Kelly Creek).
The Putnam Park Extension Project Alternative would reduce or avoid all of the proposed project's
impacts, because no residential units would be constructed and disturbance on the project site would
be limited to activities associated with the public open space, recreational amenities, and restoration
and preservation efforts. This alternative would achieve the objective of implementing General Plan
policies related to establishment of an Urban Separator and the Petaluma ring trail system and would
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 58
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
provide improved recreational access to the Helen Putnam Regional Park. The Putnam Park Extension
Project Alternative would also achieve the objectives of permanently preserving sensitive biological and
geological areas of the site as protected open space; preserving and enhancing Kelly Creek in its natural
state; preserving the barn complex; providing a public pedestrian/bicycle trail connecting to Helen
Putnam Regional Park; and providing a large extension of the Helen Putnam Regional Park, with new
trails, a restored barn complex, habitat and waterway enhancements, and related features.
The Putnam Park Extension Project Alternative is rejected for any and all of the following reasons:
• Not all project objectives would be achieved
• the objective to develop a high-quality residential project on the west side of Petaluma and
provide new housing opportunities while minimizing neighborhood impacts would not be
achieved
• the City's long term development goals, especially related to the provision of additional housing
and the objective to maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary
thereby discouraging urban sprawl would not be realized
• This alternative would present an inconsistency with the City of Petaluma General Plan and zoning
provisions, which provide for very low residential density (0.2-2.5 dwelling units per acre) on the
project site, and
• No infiltration basin would be installed and untreated runoff from Windsor Drive would continue to
drain to Kelly Creek
SECTION 7: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable risks when determining whether to
approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project
outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable.
CEQA requires the agency to support,in writing,the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable
when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on
substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record.
In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,the City finds that the mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), when
implemented, avoid or substantially lessen virtually all of the significant effects identified in the Draft and
Final EIR. Nonetheless, two significant impacts of the project are unavoidable even after incorporation of
all feasible mitigation measures. The significant unavoidable impacts are identified and discussed in
Section 5 of these Findings. The City further specifically finds that notwithstanding the disclosure of the
significant unavoidable impacts, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons
for approving the Project. Each of the following reasons provides an independent basis to support the
override of the significant and unavoidable impacts. Those reasons are enumerated below.
Implementation of the Project will:
• provide development consistent with the City's long-term development goals, especially as
related to the provision of additional housing;
• develop the project site in a manner that preserves the uniqueness and gateway value of the
site;
• implement General Plan policies related to establishment of an Urban Separator and the
Petaluma ring trail system;
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 59
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• provide improved recreational access to the Helen Putnam Regional Park;
• promote and maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary thereby
discouraging urban sprawl;
• develop a high-quality residential project on the west side of Petaluma, compatible with existing
residential subdivisions in the neighborhood and with rural and park areas to the south and west
of the site;
• permanently preserve sensitive biological and geological areas of the site as protected open
space;
• preserve and enhance Kelly Creek in its natural state;
• preserve the historic barn complex;
• provide a public pedestrian/bicycle trail connecting to Helen Putnam Regional Park; and
• provide a large extension of the Helen Putnam Regional Park, incorporating new trails, a restored
barn complex, habitat and waterway enhancements, and related features.
In addition, the Scott Ranch and RTP projects will provide the following community benefits:
• preserve over 47 acres of public open space that will be managed and maintained by Sonoma
County Regional Parks;
• realize public parklands with trails, paths, and amenities including restrooms, demonstration
corrals, outdoor educational spaces, interpretive signs, picnic area, and natural playground;
• enhance parkland accessibility for Petaluma residents;
• record two conservation easements, which will permanently limit uses to open space;
• provide for enhanced habitat preservation, increased plant diversity, and restoration;
• provide for enhanced bank stabilization, repair of eroded gullies, and riparian restoration of Kelly
Creek;
• provide for enhancements to the stock pond to improve habitat for California Red Legged Frog
• provide for improved carbon sequestration from retention of open space / enhanced native
grassland, tree protection, and new plantings, including approximately 327 new tree onsite;
• provide for the treatment of runoff from Windsor Drive (which is not currently treated);
• provide for enhanced fire protection from the managed open space at the City boundary;
• develop the project site with the lowest allowable density under the very low density land use
designation, 28 single-family residences including nine (9) junior accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
on the portion of the site closest to existing residential development;
• provide for the preservation of the historic landscape and preserve the Barn complex to provide
recreational and educational opportunities for the community;
• provide a roundabout with pedestrian crosswalks at D Street and Windsor Drive, which would
enhance safety, reduce speeds and congestion, and provide traffic control at a major gateway
to the City;
• provide for enhanced bicycle, pedestrian and multi use (including equestrian) trail access
connecting the regional park with the City (within 1.25 miles of downtown Petaluma);
• provide for enhanced frontage improvements (sidewalks, bike lane striping, sidewalk gap
closure);
• provide for an offsite sidewalk gap closure on the east side of D street north of Windsor Drive;
and
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 60
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
• provide for additional public parking for Helen Putnam Park, including the provision of electrical
vehicle charging stations.
The City Council finds that the Scott Ranch Project and the Regional Trail Project have been carefully
reviewed and that project design features and recommended mitigation measures have been
incorporated into the Scott Ranch and RTP projects to reduce all environmental effects to the fullest
extent possible. Nonetheless, the analysis has identified environmental effects which cannot be avoided
or substantially lessened.The City Council has considered each environmental effect which has not been
mitigated to a less than significant level, all as described above and in the RDEIR.
The City Council has considered the fiscal, economic, social, environmental, and orderly land use
planning benefits of the Scott Ranch and RTP projects. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081
and CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council has balanced the fiscal, economic, social,
environmental, and land use benefits of the Scott Ranch and RTP projects against its unavoidable and
unmitigated adverse environmental impacts and, based upon substantial evidence in the record, has
determined that the benefits of the Scott Ranch and RTP projects outweigh the adverse environmental
effects, and that the remaining significant and unavoidable impacts of the Scott Ranch and RTP projects
are acceptable in light of the project's multiple benefits, any one of which is sufficient to constitute
grounds for this statement of overriding considerations. The substantial evidence supporting these
overriding considerations can be found in these Findings, and in the documents comprising the Record
of Proceedings.
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-1 1 Page 61
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1DIF _HIBIT 2
City of Petaluma, California
Community Development Department
I85$ Planning Division
11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
Project Name: Scott Ranch Project
Address/Location: Northwest and southwest corners of the Windsor Drive and D Street intersection,
Petaluma, Sonoma County, California. APN 019-120-041 and 019-120-040.
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in conformance with Section
21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines. This
document has been developed to ensure implementation of mitigation measures and proper and adequate
monitoring/reporting of such implementation. CEQA requires that this MMRP be adopted in conjunction with
project approval, which relies upon a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The purpose of this MMRP is to: (1) document implementation of required mitigation; (2) identify
monitoring/reporting responsibility, be it the lead agency (City of Petaluma), other agency (responsible or
trustee agency), or a private entity (applicant, contractor, or project manager); (3) establish the frequency and
duration of monitoring/reporting; (4) provide a record of the monitoring/reporting; and (5) ensure compliance.
The following table lists each of the mitigation measures adopted by the City in conjunction with project
approval, the implementation action, timeframe to which the measure applies, the monitoring/reporting
responsibility, reporting requirements, and the status of compliance with the mitigation measure.
Implementation
The responsibilities of implementation include review and approval by City staff including the Engineering,
Planning, and Building divisions. Responsibilities include the following:
1. The applicant shall obtain all required surveys and studies and provide a copy to the City prior to issuance
of grading permits or approvals of improvements plans.
2. The applicant shall obtain all required permits, agreements, and approvals from State and Federal
regulatory agencies, as applicable and provide copies to the City prior to issuance of grading permits or
approvals of improvement plans.
3. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required mitigation measures and
conditions into the design and improvement plans and specifications for the project.
4. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, subcontractors, 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.
Page 1 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 62
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5. 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.
6. 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 be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
7. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or grading
permits and be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
8. All mitigation measures shall be incorporated as conditions of project approval.
9. The applicant shall arrange a pre-construction conference with the construction contractor, City staff, and
responsible agencies to review the mitigation measures and conditions of approval prior to the issuance
of grading and building permits.
Monitoring and Reporting
The responsibilities of monitoring and reporting include the Engineering, Planning, and Building Divisions, as
well as the Fire Department. Responsibilities include the following:
1. The Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions and Fire Department shall review the improvement and
construction plans for conformance with the approved project description and all applicable codes,
conditions, mitigation measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of a site design review,
improvement plans, grading 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.
4. City inspectors shall ensure that construction activities occur in a manner that is consistent with the
approved plans and conditions of approval.
MMRP Checklist
The following table lists each of the mitigation measures adopted by the City in connection with project
approval,the timeframe to which the measure applies,the person/agency/permit responsible for implementing
the measure, and the status of compliance with the mitigation measure.
Page 2 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 63
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
AESTHETICS
AES-1a: The following restrictions shall be placed on the design of the proposed project: • Incorporate into • Applicant
• Elements such as design, height, contouring, and massing of proposed single-
project design and • Planning Division
family development shall comply with Hillside Protection and Tree Protection construction • Building Division
ordinances. Homes shall be designed to step with the hillside and avoid solid documents
walls or overhangs that run against the natural slope of the site.
• Construction of Lots 1 through 10 shall be carefully evaluated during the Site Plan
and Architectural Review process. These lots shall only be subdivided or
developed with structures that would incorporate appropriate hillside design
elements and would not substantially block or obscure views.
• The design, height, and massing of retaining walls shall be specifically reviewed
during the Site Plan and Architectural Review process. Retaining walls shall not
exceed S feet in height unless incorporating terracing with landscaping and
minimum width of 3 feet. Retaining walls should conform to the slope where
feasible. Treatment of retaining walls that are visible from a public street shall
incorporate a veneer of natural stone, stained concrete, earth toned textured
surface,or as otherwise accepted through the Site Plan and Architectural Review
process such that walls blend in with the natural hillside environment and
promote a rural character.
• Review during the Site Plan and Architectural Review shall include project
landscape. Vegetation including woodland cover shall be reestablished on
graded slopes and between existing abutting residential structures (See also
Mitigation Measure BIO-2a). Reestablishment of vegetation near the project's
residences shall conform to the requirement of the project's Fuel Management
Program.
Aes-lb: The architectural elevations and materials used on the exterior of the residences • Incorporate into • Applicant
(including roofing materials, exterior finishing, and trim palette) shall include project design • Planning Division
natural,terrain-neutral colors and prohibit the use of brightly colored terra cotta • Building Division
or red clay roof tiles in order to limit potential visual contrast between the
proposed development and the adjacent hillsides,as determined acceptable by
the Planning Commission through the Site Plan and Architectural Review process
Page 3 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 64
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
required by Petaluma Municipal Code Section 24.010. The developer shall
include Codes, Covenants,and Restrictions(CC&R)that prohibit or limit roofing
color changes by future owners, in accordance with the Planning Commission
Site Plan and Architectural Review approval.
Aes-3a: All construction staging shall occur within the project boundaries and on • Periodic inspections • Applicant
authorized road encroachment.Construction staging areas shall use appropriate during construction to • Planning Division
screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) to screen views of ensure that measures • Building Division
construction equipment and material. are in place.
Aes-3b: Project landscaping and recreational features shall be designed and located in a • Incorporate into • Applicant
mannerto preserve the visual character of the project site and promote the view project design • Planning Division
of the barn complex.As part of the SPAR,the Applicants shall submit to the City • Building Division
of Petaluma detailed landscape plans showing the location of the new trees and
visual simulations demonstrating the preservation of the existing scenic view of
the barn complex.
AIR QUALITY
AIR-2: The construction contractor(s) shall implement the following measures during • Measures shall be • Applicant
construction: included in project • Planning Division
a All exposed surfaces e. parking areas staging areas soil piles,graded areas, design and . Building Division
p ( g•,p g g g p ,
and unpaved access roads)shall be watered two times per day. construction
documents.
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be • Periodic inspections
covered. during construction to
c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed ensure that measures
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day.The use of dry are in place.
power sweeping is prohibited.
d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
Page 4 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 65
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
e) All roadways,driveways,and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used.
f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in
use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the
California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California
Code of Regulations [CCRI). Clear signage shall be provided for construction
workers at all access points.
g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer's specifications.All equipment shall be checked
by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper working
condition prior to operation.
h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact
at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and
take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall
also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
AIR-2: The construction contractor(s) shall implement the following measures during • Measures shall be • Applicant
construction: included in project • Planning Division
a All exposed surfaces e. parkingareas,staging areas,soil piles,graded areas, design and • Building Division
) p ( g�� g g p g construction
and unpaved access roads)shall be watered two times per day.
documents.
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be • Periodic inspections
covered. during construction to
c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed ensure that measures
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day.The use of dry are in place.
power sweeping is prohibited.
d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in
use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the
Page 5 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 66
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California
Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction
workers at all access points.
f) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer's specifications.All equipment shall be checked
by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper working
condition prior to operation.
g) A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person
to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone
number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
13I0-1a: Mitigation for impacts on regulated waters shall be provided at a minimum 2:1 • Conduct construction in • Applicant
ratio as detailed in Mitigation Measure B10-3. Mitigation for impacts on habitat conformance with • Planning Division
for California reg-legged frog(CRLF)shall be provided at a minimum 3:1 ratio for measures herein.
permanent impacts and 1:1 ratio for temporary impacts,as detailed in Mitigation • Notify Planning
Measure 13I0-1b. In addition, the project Applicants shall obtain all required Division,CDFW,and
permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department USFWS in the event of
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Regional Water Quality Control Board discovery.
(RWQCB), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (e.g., 1600 series
permits, 404 and 401 permits), incidental take permits and any others. The
project Applicants will submit with the permit application a Wetland Mitigation
Program for review and approval by the regulatory agencies. The project
Applicants shall implement mitigation measures,as required byfederal and State
law and included in the permits, to avoid, minimize, or offset impacts to any
species listed under either the state or Federal Endangered Species Acts or
protected under any other state or federal law. Evidence that the project
Applicants have secured all required authorization from these agencies shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department of the City of Petaluma
prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the project.
Page 6 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 67
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
BIO-1b: A Final California Red-Legged Frog Mitigation Plan (CRLFMP)shall be prepared • Measures shall be • Applicant
by a qualified wildlife biologist to minimize and mitigate potential impacts of included in project • Planning Division
the project on CRLF.The Final CRLFMP shall be prepared in consultation with design and construction . Qualified
and be approved by the USFWS, CDFW, USACE, and City, and shall provide for documents. Biologist
the protection, replacement,and management of habitat for CRLF affected by . Preparation of a Final
proposed development and public open space use on the project site.The Final California Red-Legged
CRLFMP shall be required as a condition of approval for the project Tentative Frog Mitigation Plan
Map, and shall include the following components and meet the following
standards:
Preconstruction and Construction Avoidance Provisions
a) Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a Service-approved
biologist prior to any grading or major vegetation clearance to ensure
that no individual CRLF are lost during construction. These
preconstruction surveys shall also verify the presence or absence of
occupied dens of American badger, burrows of western burrowing
owl,and individuals of western pond turtle and foothill yellow-legged
frog in the remote instance individuals were to disperse onto the site
in advance of construction-related disturbance. The Final CRLFMP
shall: 1)describe in detail the survey approach and methodology,and
2) specify that grading or vegetation clearance may not occur in any
area where individual CRLF, American badger, western burrowing
owl, western pond turtle, and/or foothill yellow-legged frog are
located until such time as the individual has either moved out of the
disturbance zone or has been physically relocated by a Service-
approved biologist legally authorized to handle the species. Any
relocation effort for CRLF, American badger, western burrowing owl,
western pond turtle and/or foothill yellow-legged frog shall be
formulated in consultation with and approved by CDFW and USFWS
and shall be implemented by a qualified biologist.
b) All project-related vegetation clearing and grading activities within
potential habitat for CRLF shall be monitored by a Service-approved
Page 7 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 68
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
biologist. The Final CRLFMP shall specify the duties of the Service-
approved biologist.
c) All construction personnel shall be trained in CRLF identification,
habitat description, legal protective status, construction restrictions,
and procedures to avoid unnecessary disturbance to potential habitat
or incidental take of these species. The Final CRLFMP shall describe
this training program.
d) Exclusionary fencing shall be installed prior to grading or major
vegetation clearance where appropriate to keep CRLF out of
construction areas. The Final CRLFMP shall identify where such
fencing is to be installed and provide procedures for fence installation,
monitoring,and maintenance.The Final CRLFMP shall require that the
exclusionary fencing be installed under the direct supervision of a
Service-approved biologist and shall be maintained during the course
of construction activities on the site.
e) If necessary, identify the locations for use of permanent exclusionary
fencing or other barriers to prevent and minimize dispersal of CRLF
into areas with concentrated human activity, based on input from the
USFWS and CDFW. This may be particularly important at locations
along segments of the multi-use trail to the south of Kelly Creek or
parking lot and staging area on the east side of the D Street tributary,
to prevent the movement of individual frogs into areas, of intensive
bike, pedestrian and vehicle activity. If used, the permanent
exclusionary fencing/barriers shall be designed and installed during
project construction under the supervision of a Service-approved
biologist.
f) Appropriate signage shall be designed and installed to restrict
unauthorized human access into essential habitat areas for CRLF
during construction.
Habitat Avoidance and Mitigation Provisions
Page 8 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 69
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
g) Avoid development and associated direct and indirect impacts on
CRLF in accordance with project revisions required as part of the
consultation review and approval process with CDFW and USFWS.
Compensatory mitigation shall be provided at a minimum of 3:1 for
permanent impacts and 1:1 for temporary impacts to CRLF habitat.
This may be accomplished through permanent protection and
establishment of two conservation easements or other mechanisms
of suitable habitat on-site and off-site,where necessary to achieve the
minimum compensatory mitigation requirements or as otherwise
required by the CDFW and USFWS.
h) Control unauthorized access to the on-site stock pond and open space
in the southwestern portion of the project site to protect these
essential habitat features for CRLF. Install fencing and interpretive
displays and restrictive signage along all trail systems as necessary to
control access from the proposed multi-use trails and other locations
where unauthorized access is likely.
i) Where disturbance and improvements within essential habitat and
movement corridors cannot be completely avoided and on-site
mitigation is considered insufficient by the CDFW and USFWS,the loss
shall be mitigated by permanently preserving similar quality habitat
known to support CRLF at off-site locations preferably in the Petaluma
vicinity of Sonoma County, as negotiated with the regulatory
agencies.It is possible that the mitigation location,whether on-site or
possibly off-site as well,could be used to achieve mitigation for other
biological and wetland impacts, depending on its habitat
characteristics, provisions for habitat creation and/or enhancement
defined as part of the Final CRLFMP,and negotiations with the CDFW
and USFWS.
j) Identify methods to minimize the potential for harassment or take of
listed and non-listed species as a result of increased human activity
associated with development and open space use of the site.This shal I
include an educational program for future residents and visitors,
Page 9 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 70
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
fencing and interpretive signage at access points into natural open
space, use of sensitive grade changes,culverted under-crossings,and
bridged overcrossings in uplands where roadways or trails bisect
movement corridors, and possible use of permanent exclusionary
fencing.
Habitat Connectivity and On-Site Management Provisions
k) Define methods to provide connectivity for CRLF between open space
areas on site and to the surrounding undeveloped lands to the west,
south,and east.
1) Provide for permanent protection and adaptive management of open
space lands (both on-site and possibly off-site) intended to function
as potential habitat for CRLF.
Page 10 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 71
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
BIO-1c: Any active nests of raptors or other birds protected under federal and state • Measures shall be • Applicant
regulations in the vicinity of construction shall be avoided until young birds are included in project • Planning Division
able to leave the nest (i.e., fledged) and forage on their own. Avoidance may design and construction . Qualified
be accomplished either by scheduling grading, vegetation removal and documents. biologist
demolition activities during the non-nesting period (September 1 through • Pre-construction survey • CDFW
January 31), or if this is not feasible, by conducting a preconstruction survey
for raptor and other bird nests. Provisions of the pre-construction survey and
nest avoidance, if necessary,shall include the following:
a) To avoid "take" of barn owls in the large barn, any relocation or restoration
work shall be initiated in the non-nesting period or shall be performed in
conformance with the pre-construction survey procedures detailed below.
b) If grading is scheduled during the active nesting period (February 15 through
August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nest
survey no more than 15 days prior to initiation of grading to provide
confirmation on presence or absence of active nests in the vicinity.
c) If active nests are encountered,species-specific measures shall be prepared by
a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active
nest.At a minimum,grading and vegetation removal in the vicinity of the nest
shall be deferred until the young birds have fledged or are no longer dependent
on the nest. A nest setback zone shall be established within which all
construction-related disturbances shall be prohibited. These are typically at
least 300 feet for all raptors and 100 feet for other birds protected under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and State Fish and Game Code, unless site-specific
conditions allow for some variation from these distances as determined by the
qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW. The perimeter of the
nest-setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with staked
flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel restricted from the
area.
d) If permanent avoidance of the nest is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized
by prohibiting disturbance within the nest-setback zone until a qualified
biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and
Page 11 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 72
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
incubation, or b) that the juveniles from the nest are foraging independently
and capable of independent survival.
e) Demolition of any existing buildings and removal of any trees shall also
consider possible bat use of the site, as defined below in Mitigation Measure
BIO-1d.
f) A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that the young birds have
fledged shall be submitted to the Community Development Department of the
City of Petaluma prior to initiation of grading and vegetation removal in the
nest-setback zone.
BIO-1d: Measures shall be taken to avoid possible loss of bats during project . Conduct surveys in • Qualified
construction.Any buildings that are approved for demolition, rehabilitation,or accordance with this biologist
relocation shall be done using the following provisions: measure. • Applicant
a) Any buildings approved for removal shall be demolished between March 1 (or • Conduct construction in . Planning Division
after evening temperatures rise above 45 degrees F and/or no more than %2„ conformance with • CDFW
of rainfall within 24 hours occurs)to April 15 or from August 31 to October 15 measures herein.
(or before evening temperatures fall below 45 degrees F and/or more than%" • Notify Planning Division
of rainfall within 24 hours occurs)to minimize the likelihood of removal during and CDFW in the event
the winter roosting period when individuals are less active and more difficult of discovery.
to detect, and the critical pupping period (April 16 to August 30) when young
cannot disperse.
b) Buildings shall be surveyed by a qualified bat biologist possessing a
Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFW no more than 2 weeks before
demolition and/or relocation work is undertaken to avoid "take" of any bats
that may have begun to use the structures for roosting subsequent to the
assessments by Wildlife Research Associates(2004 and 2014).The buildings in
which roosting would be most likely to occur are the large two-story barn, hay
barn,and garage building.
c) If the pre-demolition survey reveals bats or bat roosting activity, all doors and
windows shall be opened and left open continually until demolition,relocation
and/or rehabilitation work is to begin. Additional recommendations may be
Page 12 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 73
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
made by the qualified bat specialist following the pre-construction survey,
including monitoring of demolition and/or relocation and other measures to
avoid take of individual bats.
d) A tree roost habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist
possessing a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFW of any trees that
will be removed as part of the project. The habitat assessment shall be
conducted no more than 2 weeks prior to tree removal and vegetation clearing.
Additional detailed measures may be required based on the results of the
habitat assessment if evidence of bat roosting is observed. This may include
supervision of tree removal by the qualified bat biologist, and systematic
removal of selected trees and major limbs to encourage dispersal and avoid
"take"of individual bats.
13I0-2a: A detailed Landscape and Vegetation Management Plan (Plan) shall be • Measures shall be • Applicant
prepared by a qualified landscape architect in consultation with CDFW and a included in project • Planning Division
plant ecologist experienced with native species. The Plan shall: 1) provide for design and construction
re-establishment of grassland, riparian, and oak woodland cover on graded documents.
slopes in open space areas; 2) incorporate mitigation requirements to replace
and enhance wetland habitat and provide for replacement of native trees
removed as part of the project;3)provide for replacement of native grasslands
lost as a result of development and trail improvements;4) identify unsuitable
species which should not be used in landscaping;5)prevent the establishment
and spread of introduced broom; and 6) specify long-term management
provisions to ensure re-establishment of native and ornamental landscape
improvements.Aspects of the plan shall include, but will not be limited to,the
following:
a) Graded slopes in open space areas shall be reseeded with a mixture of native
perennial and annual grassland species to increase the diversity of the
grassland cover.Suitable species to be used in the seed mix include: California
brome(Bromus carinatus),purple needlegrass(Stipa pulchra),creeping wildrye
(Elymus tritichoides),California poppy(Escscholtzia californica),among others.
Page 13 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 74
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
Highly invasive non-native annuals, typically used for erosion control alone,
should not be used.
b) Landscaping and revegetation shall emphasize the use of native plant species
along the fringe of proposed development, and plantings in open space areas
should be restricted to native species. Suitable plant species for use in open
space areas include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Quercus
agrifolia), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), toyon (Heteromeles
arbutifolia), California rose (Rosa californica), creeping wildrye, and purple
needlegrass, among other species.
c) Use of non-native, invasive species which may spread into adjacent
undeveloped open space areas shall be prohibited in landscaping plans.
Unsuitable species include: blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus), acacia
(Acacia spp.), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), broom (Cytisus spp.), gorse
(Ulex europaeus), bamboo (Bambusa spp.), giant reed (Arundo donax),
periwinkle (Vinca spp.), English ivy (Hedera helix), and German ivy (Senecio
milanioides). This prohibition shall be included in the CC&R for the proposed
residential subdivision, as well as undeveloped areas to be retained as
permanent open space.
d) Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to
prevent establishment and spread of introduced broom species (Cytisus spp
and Genista monspesullana).This should apply to the lands on the project site
that are placed under a conservation easement as well as common open space
areas. The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter
removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated and cutting back of any
remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April.
e) Provisions for maintenance of landscaping and revegetation of graded slopes
shall be specified as part of the plan, with replacement plantings and seeding
provided as necessary to ensure re-establishment of cover.Tree replacement
shall be at ratios consistent with Mitigation Measure 1310-2d below and meet
with the intent of Petaluma Municipal Code Section 20.32.320. Maintenance
Page 14 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 75
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
and monitoring of mitigation and habitat enhancement plantings in open space
areas shall be provided for a minimum of five years.
f) Vehicles and motorcycles shall not be allowed to travel off designated
roadways and limits of grading to minimize future disturbance to grassland
cover and other vegetation, and unauthorized access to the surrounding
undeveloped lands and open space.
13I0-2b: The Tree Preservation Plans shall be updated and refined to comply with the • Measures shall be • Applicant
requirements of IZO Chapter 17. The Grading Plan and Landscape Plan shall included in project • Planning Division
include the mapped location of tree trunks, including those which will be design and construction
preserved or removed, show the recommended tree protection zones, and documents.
identify locations of construction-restriction fencing.
BIO-2c: A Tree Replacement Program shall be prepared as part of the Landscape and • Measures shall be • Applicant
Vegetation Management Plan to provide for replacement of individual native included in project • Planning Division
trees removed by proposed development. The Tree Replacement Program design and construction
shall provide for replacement of impacted individual native trees consistent documents.
with Petaluma Municipal Code Section 20.32.320 and Implementing Zoning
Ordinance Section 17.065, and shall be accomplished on-site in designated
open space areas. Tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a
minimum of 5 years by a qualified biologist or landscape specialist. All water
used for temporary irrigation shall be from wells and/or municipal supplies and
not diverted out of Kelly Creek, the stock pond or tributary drainages to
prevent any potential secondary adverse impacts to existing aquatic habitats.
Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio
on an annual basis to maintain the replacement values specified in the
Municipal Code and Implementing Ordinance.
13I0-2d: To avoid creation of informal trails through native grasslands on Helen Putnam • Measures shall be • Applicant
Regional Park adjacent to the project site, the existing fence between the included in project • Planning Division
project site and the regional park to the north of Kelly Creek shall be design and construction
maintained and strengthened to control unauthorized entry into the regional documents.
Page 15 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 76
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
park from the terminus of the Kelly Creek multi-use trail. As and when the
regional park trail project is constructed,the fence may be removed.
13I0-2e: A Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program (Program) shall be • Measures shall be • Applicant
developed by a qualified biologist in consultation with CDFW to address the included in project . Planning Division
loss of native grasslands on the site and provide for adequate replacement.The design and construction . Qualified
Program shall define short-term construction controls and long-term documents. biologist
maintenance requirements necessary to ensure grasslands are successfully . Native Grassland
reestablished and existing and restored native grasslands remain viable. The Avoidance and
maintenance and management requirements shall include provisions for Replacement Program
annual invasive species removal, and control on the establishment of both
native and non-native trees and shrubs that could eventually shade out the
grassland to be protected. The Final Program shall be subject to review and
approval by the City and CDFW. The Program shall contain the following
provisions and performance standards:
a) The proposed limits of grading and enhancement tree plantings shall be
modified to avoid additional areas of the stands of native grassland on the site
and a compensatory mitigation component prepared and implemented to
provide a minimum 1:1 replacement ratio for grasslands lost as a result of the
project.
b) Areas retained or restored as native grassland shall be permanently protected
as open space and managed as native grassland by deed restriction or
conservation easement.
c) To prevent inadvertent disturbance of native grassland to be preserved,these
areas shall be flagged in the field prior to any vegetation removal or grading for
habitat restoration,and temporary orange construction fencing installed under
supervision of the qualified biologist around all areas to be retained within 50
feet of proposed disturbance.
d) Areas of native grassland within the limits of proposed grading and
construction shall be salvaged and used in revegetation efforts implemented
as part of the Program. Salvage material may include mature seed and intact
Page 16 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 77
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
stem and root material, which shall be stored and maintained until ready for
reinstallation in the late fall/early winter when conditions are optimal for
successful reestablishment.
e) Personnel involved in habitat restoration activities shall be trained by the
qualified biologist over the sensitivity of the native grasslands, purpose of the
temporary orange construction fencing, and that all construction-related
disturbance should be restricted outside of the fence.
f) A monitoring program shall be implemented by the qualified biologist to
oversee successful establishment of any native grasslands to be restored, and
shall define both short-term and long-term requirements. Permanent
monitoring transects shall be established as part ofthe program and vegetation
data collected in the spring and summer months when plant identification is
possible. Photo stations shall be established along each monitoring transect,
and photographs taken every year during the required monitoring period.
Performance standards, success criteria, and contingency measures shall be
defined as part of the Program. Monitoring transects shall be established over
each location to be vegetated as native grassland,and monitored on an annual
basis. Within a five-year period, native grass shall be successfully established
over all treatment areas and shall comprise a minimum 50 percent of the
relative cover. Monitoring shall be extended where the success criteria are not
met,and the minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is not reached.The Program and
its requirements may be modified to require further measures if monitoring
shows that performance standards are not being met.
g) Annual monitoring reports shall be prepared by the qualified biologist and
submitted to the CDFW and the Community Development Department of the
City of Petaluma by December 31 of each monitoring year, for a minimum of
five years or until the defined success criteria are met.The annual report shall
summarize the results of the monitoring effort, performance standards, and
any required contingency measures, and shall include photographs of the
monitoring transects and program success. Maps shall be included in the
Page 17 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 78
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
monitoring report to show the location of monitoring transects and photo
stations.
13I0-3: A Final Wetland Replacement and Enhancement Program (WREP) shall be • Final Wetland • Applicant
prepared and implemented to compensate for the loss of jurisdictional waters Replacement and . Planning Division
on the project site. The Final WREP shall be prepared by a qualified wetland Enhancement Program . Qualified wetland
consultant in consultation with and for review and approval by the City, the consultant
RWQCB, the USACE, and the CDFW. The Final WREP shall clearly identify the • RWQCB
total wetlands and other jurisdictional areas affected by the project, shall . USACE
identify compensatory mitigation to replace wetland habitat lost as a result of . CDFW
development, and provide for re-establishment, enhancement, and/or
replacement of wetlands. The Final WREP shall include the following
performance standards:
a) Identify the location(s) of mitigation sites and provide for replacement of
wetland habitat loss at a minimum replacement ratio of 2:1. Create or restore
wetlands with high functions and values in accordance with USACE and RWQCB
standards. Compensatory mitigation can be achieved through on- or off-site
habitat creation or through the use of an approved mitigation bank, or a
combination thereof.
b) Specify performance criteria, maintenance and long-term management
responsibilities, monitoring requirements, and contingency measures. This
shall include expanding the compensatory mitigation to achieve a replacement
ratio of at least 2:1 (or as otherwise required by regulatory agencies).
Monitoring shall be conducted by the project applicant's consulting wetland
specialist for a minimum of five years and continue until the success criteria
are met.
c) Define site grading, preparation and revegetation procedures, an
implementation schedule, and funding sources to ensure long-term
management of the Final WREP.
d) The mitigation (habitat restoration or enhancement)effort shall be considered
successful when the performance standards are met. Performance standards
Page 18 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 79
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
would be met when the habitat has sustained itself for a minimum of two years
in the absence of significant maintenance measures.
e) Subsequent permitting processes with resource agencies could result in
additional mitigation beyond that required by the City in the CECIA process.Any
additional mitigation required by the agencies (the RWQCB, the USACE, and
the CDFW)would be incorporated as conditions of their permit authorization.
BIO-4a: An interpretive program shall be developed by a qualified biologist in • Development of • Applicant
cooperation with the project landscape architect which serves to educate park interpretive program • Planning Division
visitors and trail users of the sensitivity of Kelly Creek and D Street tributary as within final Landscape • Qualified
wildlife movement corridors, and the importance of remaining outside the Plan biologist
southern portion of the site to protect the stock pond and surrounding uplands
to CRLF and other wildlife that are sensitive to human disturbance. The
interpretive program shall be integrated into the final Landscape Plan for the
project. Interpretive elements of the program shall include use of permanent
signage at the trail heads, all pedestrian bridge crossings, and other critical
locations.The signage shall explain the sensitivity of the open space for wildlife
and the importance of staying on the improved trails and out of restricted
areas. Dogs,cats,and other pets shall be leashed at all times in the open space
areas on the site, and signage shall be provided at the trail heads at D Street
and Windsor Drive explaining this restriction and need to prevent harassment
of wildlife by unleashed pets.
13I0-4b: The existing plywood barrier fence on the east side of the D Street concrete • Measures shall be • Applicant
box culvert undercrossing shall be removed as part of initial construction included in project • Planning Division
activities to improve opportunities for wildlife movement along the Kelly Creek design and construction
corridor. Replacement fencing at this undercrossing shall be prohibited to documents.
prevent future obstruction of wildlife movement along Kelly Creek.
13I0-4c: Fencing, signage, dense native vegetation, and other deterrents shall be used • Measures shall be • Applicant
as part of the interpretive program to adequately contain livestock, included in project • Planning Division
equestrians and other visitors with their pets from sensitive wildlife areas, design and construction
including Kelly Creek, the D Street tributary, and stock pond. Exclusionary documents.
Page 19 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 80
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
fencing used to contain livestock and control access by visitors and their pets
shall be wildlife-friendly in design, such as barbed wire with a smooth bottom
wire. Signs shall be posted along the trails limiting access of equestrian to
designated trails at all times.
13I0-4d: The existing fencing between the western boundary of the project site and • Measures shall be • Applicant
Helen Putnam Regional Park south of Kelly Creek shall be removed where it included in project • Planning Division
borders lands to be dedicated as permanent open space on the project site, design and construction
and replaced with wildlife-friendly fencing, such as barbed wire with smooth documents.
bottom wire, if fencing is necessary. This would improve opportunities for
wildlife movement between the existing parklands and the future open space
lands on the project site.
RPT 1310-1a: Sonoma County Regional Parks or its agent shall obtain all required • Measures shall be • Applicant
permits before construction from the USFWS,CDFW, RWQCB,and USACE(e.g., included in project • Planning Division
1600 series permits, 404 and 401 permits), incidental take permits and any design and construction
others and implement mitigation measures, as required by federal and state documents.
law,to avoid, minimize,or offset impacts to any species listed under either the
state or federal Endangered Species Acts or protected under any other state or
federal law.
RPT 1310-1b: A Final California Red-Legged Frog Mitigation Plan (CRLFMP) shall be • Measures shall be • Applicant
prepared by a qualified wildlife biologist to minimize and mitigate potential included in project • Planning Division
impacts of the project on CRLF. The Final CRLFMP shall be prepared in design and construction • Sonoma County
consultation with USFWS, CDFW, and USACE and shall provide for the documents. Regional Parks
protection, replacement,and management of habitat for CRLF affected by the
regional park trail. The Final CRLFMP shall include the following components
and meet the following standards:
a) Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a Service-approved biologist
prior to any grading or vegetation clearance to ensure that no individual CRLF
are lost during construction.The Final CRLFMP shall: 1) describe in detail the
survey approach and methodology, and 2) specify that grading or vegetation
clearance may not occur in any area where individual CRLF are located until
Page 20 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 81
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
such time as the individual has either moved out of the disturbance zone or has
been physically relocated by a Service-approved biologist legally authorized to
handle the species.
b) All vegetation clearing and grading activities within potential habitat for CRLF
shall be monitored by a Service-approved biologist. The Final CRLFMP shall
specify the duties of the Service-approved biologist.
c) All construction personnel shall be trained in CRLF identification, habitat
description, legal protective status, construction restrictions, and procedures
to avoid unnecessary disturbance to potential habitat or incidental take of
these species.The Final CRLFMP shall describe this training program.
d) Exclusionary fencing shall be installed prior to grading or major vegetation
clearance where appropriate to keep CRLF out of construction areas, if
required by the USFWS and/or CDFW. The Final CRLFMP shall identify where
such fencing is to be installed and provide procedures for fence installation,
monitoring,and maintenance,if required.The exclusionary fencing be installed
under the direct supervision of a Service-approved biologist and shall be
maintained during the course of construction activities on the site.
e) Sonoma County Regional Parks shall prohibit access by unleashed dogs and
require that dogs be leashed,and that access be limited to designated trails at
all times to minimize the potential for inadvertent take of CRLF.
f) Sonoma County Regional Parks shall post signs along the trails limiting access
of equestrian to designated trails at all times.
g) Sonoma County Regional Parks shall implement measures to minimize the
potential for harassment or take of listed and non-listed species as a result of
increased human activity associated with the proposed trail.This shall include
an educational program for future park visitors, signage at access points into
open space and other key locations, and possible use of permanent
exclusionary fencing, if required by the USFWS. Appropriate interpretive
signage shall be provided instructing park users on access rules to prevent
inadvertent take of CRLF.
Page 21 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 82
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
RPT BIO-1c: Active nests of raptor, loggerhead shrike, or other birds protected Measures shall be • Applicant
under federal and state regulations in the vicinity of construction shall be included in project • Planning Division
avoided until young birds are able to leave the nest (i.e., fledged) and forage design and construction
on their own. Avoidance may be accomplished either by scheduling grading, documents.
vegetation removal and revegetation activities during the non-nesting period
(August 30 through February 14),or if this is not feasible, by conducting a pre-
construction survey for raptor, loggerhead shrike, and other bird nests.
Provisions of the pre-construction survey and nest avoidance, if necessary,
shall include the following:
a) If grading is scheduled during the active nesting period (February 15 through
August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nest
survey no more than 15 days prior to initiation of grading to provide
confirmation on presence or absence of active nests in the vicinity.
b) If active nests are encountered,species-specific measures shall be prepared by
a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active
nest. At a minimum, grading in the vicinity of the nest shall be deferred until
the young birds have fledged. A nest-setback zone of at least 300 feet for all
raptors and 100 feet for loggerhead shrike and other birds protected under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be established within which all construction-
related disturbances shall be prohibited. The perimeter of the nest-setback
zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with staked flagging at 20-foot
intervals,and construction personnel restricted from the area.
c) If permanent avoidance of the nest is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized
by prohibiting disturbance within the nest-setback zone until a qualified
biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and
incubation, or b) that the juveniles from the nest are foraging independently
and capable of independent survival at an earlier date.
d) A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that the young have fledged
shall be submitted to the Sonoma County Regional Parks prior to initiation of
grading in the nest-setback zone.
Page 22 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 83
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
RPT BIO-1d: In advance of any trail construction through the Helen Putnam Measures shall be • Applicant
Regional Park, a qualified botanist shall conduct detailed preconstruction included in project • Planning Division
surveys in spring and summer to confirm absence of any special-status plant design and construction
species along the trail alignment.The survey shall focus on special-status plant documents.
species considered to have a potential for occurrence in grassland, woodland
scrub and riparian habitats from the Petaluma vicinity,and shall be conducted
according to the latest CDFW survey guidelines.The surveys shall be completed
and a report of findings shall be submitted to the Sonoma County Regional
Parks before the start of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction.
If populations of any special-status plant species are encountered along the
trail alignment, then Sonoma County Regional Parks shall ensure that
construction-related impacts are avoided through changes in trail alignment or
adequately mitigated by retaining a qualified botanist to develop and
implement a Special-Status Plant Species Mitigation and Monitoring Program
(Program). A Program shall only be required if a listed species or those
maintained on Lists 1B or 2 of the CNPS Inventory are encountered during the
preconstruction survey and cannot be avoided. Potential impacts on any
species maintained on Lists 3 and 4 of the CNPS Inventory would not be
considered significant and no additional mitigation would be required for these
species if encountered during the preconstruction survey.
The Program shall be prepared in consultation with the CDFW and shall be
approved by Sonoma County Regional Park prior to any initial ground-
disturbing activity or construction. The Program shall be based on the status
and vulnerability of the species present with avoidance of all or a majority of
any population(s)the preferred method of mitigation.Where complete or even
partial avoidance of any special-status plant population(s) is considered
infeasible, options for mitigation may include salvage and reestablishing the
population at an alternative, suitable location. Details of any salvage and
habitat recreation effort shall include the following criteria and performance
standards:
Page 23 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 84
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
a) Collection of seeds/roots/vegetative material during the appropriate
developmental stage of the plant.
b) Procedures for sowing/replanting techniques appropriate to the life cycle of
the plant.
c) Development of a maintenance and monitoring plan specific to the
environmental conditions necessary for survival of the new population.
Maintenance and monitoring shall be provided for a minimum of five years to
determine success of re-seeding and habitat creation and need for additional
preservation.
d) Identification of funding sources by Sonoma County Regional Parks to provide
implementation of the Program in consultation with the qualified plant
ecologist.
e) In addition,preservation of another existing occurrence of the affected special-
status plant species shall be required if monitoring indicates that the re-
establishment efforts have not been successful after five years. The
preservation program shall provide for permanent protection of a different
existing population in Sonoma County,which is equal or larger in size than that
encountered on the site(minimum 1:1 replacement),through land acquisition,
use of a conservation easement, or some other permanent land protection
method. Any off-site mitigation lands shall include establishment of a
management endowment as necessary to provide for long-term management
of the preserved population.
Page 24 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 85
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
RPT BIO-2: A Native Grassland Avoidance and Replacement Program (Program) • Measures shall be • Applicant
shall be developed by a qualified biologist to address the loss of native included in project • Planning Division
grasslands along the trail alignment and provide for adequate replacement. design and construction
The Program shall contain the following provisions and performance documents.
standards:
a) Under the supervision of a qualified biologist, the proposed limits of grading
shall be modified and controlled to avoid areas of native grassland along the
trail alignment to the maximum extent feasible and a compensatory mitigation
component prepared and implemented to provide a minimum 1:1 replacement
ratio for grasslands lost as a result of trail improvements.
b) Areas of native grassland adjacent to the trail alignment shall be flagged in the
field prior to any vegetation removal or grading, and temporary orange
construction fencing installed under supervision of the qualified biologist to
avoid any inadvertent damage.
c) Construction personnel shall be trained by the qualified biologist over the
sensitivity of the native grasslands, purpose of the temporary orange
construction fencing, and that all construction-related disturbance should be
restricted outside of the fence.
d) Areas of native grassland within the limits of proposed grading and
construction shall be salvaged and used in revegetation efforts implemented
as part of the Program.Salvage material shall include seed and both intact stem
and root material, which shall be stored and maintained until ready for
reinstallation in the late fall/early winter when conditions are optimal for
successful reestablishment.
e) A monitoring program shall be implemented by the qualified biologist to
oversee successful establishment of any native grasslands to be restored, and
shall define both short-term and long-term requirements.The Program and its
requirements may be modified to require further measures if monitoring
shows that performance standards are not being met.
Page 25 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 86
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
f) Annual monitoring reports shall be prepared by the qualified biologist for a
minimum of five years or until the defined success criteria are met.The annual
report shall summarize the results of the monitoring effort, performance
standards, and any required contingency measures, and shall include
photographs of the monitoring transects and program success. Maps shall be
included in the monitoring report to show the location of monitoring transects
and photo stations.
RPT BIO-3: As called for in Mitigation Measure RPT 1310-1a, authorizations shall • Measures shall be • Applicant
be secured by Sonoma County Regional Parks or its agent from the USACE, included in project • Planning Division
RWQCB,and CDFW for proposed trail improvements where they pass through design and construction
jurisdictional waters, and all conditions and mitigation measures required documents.
under these authorizations shall be implemented as part of the project.
Appropriate measures shall be developed and implemented to minimize
disturbance to jurisdictional waters, prevent erosion and sedimentation, and
revegetate areas disturbed by trail construction. This shall include: 1)
construction during the dry season after all affected drainages are dry and
surface water is absent; 2) installation of temporary orange construction
fencing at the limits of proposed construction at the drainage crossings and
vicinity of wetland seeps in advance of grading and other disturbance; 3) use
of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the potential for erosion
and sedimentation such as installation of straw wattle, jute fabric or other
surface controls on graded slopes within 30 feet of the drainage crossings;and
4) revegetation of all disturbed slopes outside the actual footprint of the trail
through broadcast seeding with native grass and forb seed or other technique
within 30 feet of the drainage crossings.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Page 26 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 87
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
CUL-1a: Prior to the relocation of the barn structures, a qualified historic preservation Measures shall be • Applicant
architect shall be selected by the City of Petaluma to review the relocation plans included in project • Planning Division
and verify that the relocation is not affecting the building structures and design and • Qualified Historic
character defining features. To ensure the barn structures would retain their construction preservation
eligibility for the local designation,the barn structures shall be relocated within documents. architect
the same general area and the new location shall be compatible with their
original character and use.
CUL-1b: The Applicants shall retain a qualified preservation architect to oversee the • Measures shall be • Applicant
relocation process and ensure that all the relocation activities are included in project • Planning Division
implemented in compliance with the relocation plans reviewed under design and • Qualified Historic
Mitigation Measure CUL-1a. construction preservation
documents. architect
CUL-2a: Prior to excavation and construction on the proposed project site, the prime • Notify Professional • Applicant
construction contractor and any subcontractor(s) shall be informed by a Archaeologist and • Professional
qualified archaeologist retained by the project Applicants, on the legal and/or Planning Division in the Archaeologist
regulatory implications of knowingly destroying cultural resources or removing event of potentially • Planning Division
historic or prehistoric artifacts, human remains, and other cultural materials significant
from the project site as outlined in Mitigation Measure CULT2b below. archaeological resource
discovery.
• Include measure on
project construction
and improvement
plans.
CUL-2b: Prior to commencing any demolition, excavation, or other ground-disturbing • Notify Professional • Applicant
activities, the project Applicants shall retain a qualified archaeologist to Archaeologist and • Professional
monitor construction activity. The City shall approve the selected project Planning Division in the Archaeologist
archaeologist prior to issuance of the grading and/or demolition permit. The event of potentially • Planning Division
selected project archaeologist shall be present at the preconstruction meeting significant
to discuss what protocols should be followed with respect to the potential
Page 27 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 88
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
discovery of prehistoric or historic artifacts of possible significance. The archaeological resource
selected project archaeologist shall have the authority to perform full time or discovery.
spot check monitoring of subsurface construction and watch for and evaluate • Include measure on
artifacts or resources that may be uncovered. project construction
The selected project archaeologist shall have the authority to halt excavation and improvement
and construction activities in the immediate vicinity (distance to be plans.
determined by the project archaeologist) of a find if significant or potentially
significant cultural resources are exposed and could be adversely affected by
construction operations. Construction activities could continue in other areas
of the project site where no cultural resources have been identified.
CUL-2c: Should archaeological resources be encountered during ground-disturbing • Measures shall be • Applicant
activities (i.e., grading and excavation), the project archaeologist shall initiate included in project • Professional
sampling, identification, and evaluation of the resources. If the archaeological design and Archaeologist
resources are found to be significant,the archaeologist shall take appropriate construction • Planning Division
actions in conjunction with the City for preservation and/or data recovery, documents.
including recordation with the California Historic Resources Information
System (CHRIS) and professional museum curation as appropriate. Following
the completion of evaluation and data recovery, the archaeologist shall
prepare a professional report detailing the results of the find and submit it to
the City of Petaluma Community Development Department and to CHRIS along
with a DPR form to ensure that resource inventories are accurately updated.
CUL-3: Procedures to be implemented following the discovery of human remains have • Measures shall be • Applicant
been mandated by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources included in project • Professional
Code Section 5097.98 and the California Code of Regulations Section design and Archaeologist
15064.5(e) (CEQA).According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are construction • Planning Division
discovered at the project site during construction, work at the specific documents.
construction area at which the remains have been uncovered shall be
suspended, and the City of Petaluma and County of Sonoma coroner shall be
immediately notified. If the remains are determined by the County coroner to
be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall
be notified within 24 hours, who will, in turn, notify the person the NAHC
Page 28 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 89
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
identifies as the most likely descendent ("MLD") of any human remains. The
guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and subsequent
disposition of the remains. Further actions shall be determined, in part, by the
desires of the MILD. The MILD has 48 hours to make recommendations
regarding the disposition of the remains following notification from the NAHC
of the discovery. If the MILD does not make recommendations within 48 hours,
the owner shall,with appropriate dignity,re-inter the remains in an area of the
property secure from further disturbance.Alternatively, if the owner does not
accept the MLD's recommendations, the owner or the descendent may
request mediation by the NAHC.
RPT CUL-1a: If archaeological materials,artifacts,culturally modified soil deposits, • Measures shall be • Applicant
or other indicators of a potentially significant cultural resource are included in project • Planning Division
encountered anywhere in the project site, all work should be halted in the design and
vicinity and an archaeologist consulted immediately. construction
documents.
RPT CUL-1b: If human remains are encountered anywhere on the property, all • Measures shall be • Applicant
work must stop in the immediate vicinity of the discovered remains and the included in project • Planning Division
County Coroner and a qualified archaeologist must be notified immediately so design and
that an evaluation can be performed. construction
If the remains are deemed to be Native American and prehistoric, the Native documents.
American Heritage Commission must be contacted by the Coroner so that a
"Most Likely Descendant"can be designated
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1a: The project Applicants shall submit for City's approval a • Incorporate • Applicant/
preconstruction design-level geotechnical report for the Davidon (28-Lot) geotechnical Contractor/
Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project recommendations into Geotechnical
component. The report shall include all applicable geologic report standards, project construction Engineer
reconnaissance and subsurface exploration data, laboratory test results, and and improvement • Public Works and
conclusions and recommendations, including, but not limited to, those plans. Utilities
pertaining to: 1) site preparation, excavation, fill placement and compaction, • Building Division
Page 29 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 90
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
temporary and permanent cut and fill slope inclinations (including whether The project
slopes steeper than 3:1 can be used at the site), slope stability, slope erosion geotechnical engineer
mitigation, and landslide movement mitigation; 2) surface and subsurface shall inspect the
drainage systems, including drainage associated with grading for landslide construction work and
movement mitigation and new cut and fill slopes;3)foundations and floors for shall certify to the City,
planned residential structures;4)foundations for planned site improvements, prior to issuance of a
including, but not limited to restrooms, barn, pedestrian bridges, and other certificate of occupancy
structures;5)settlement and swell estimates for planned residential structures that the improvements
and site improvements, including those bearing of engineered fill; 6) have been constructed
foundations,back-drains,and lateral earth pressures for site retaining walls;7) in accordance with the
seismic design parameters for the planned residential structures, site geotechnical
improvements, and site retaining walls; 8) pavement design for driveways, specifications.
parking lots, pathways and trails, where applicable; 9) utility trench backfill,
including check dams and trench drainage, if appropriate; 10)
geologic/geotechnical construction monitoring, testing, and certification
requirements; and 11) loop trail construction and long-term maintenance
requirements, including criteria for inspecting and maintaining pedestrian
bridges,culverts,and pathway surfaces,as appropriate.
The geotechnical report shall include measures, as necessary, to reduce the
potential for static and earthquake-induced slope movements that may
adversely impact the Davidon (28-Lot) Residential Project component and the
Putnam Park Extension Project component including areas currently underlain
by mapped landslides.Engineering analyses shall estimate the factors of safety
against slope movements within the planned development area and estimates
of the magnitude and location of earthquake-induced slope deformation.
GEO-1b:As determined by the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official, all • Incorporate • Applicant/
recommendations outlined in the preconstruction design-level geotechnical geotechnical Contractor/
report for the Davidon(28-Lot)Residential Project component and the Putnam recommendations into Geotechnical
Park Extension Project component, as described under Mitigation Measure project construction Engineer
GEO-1a,are herein incorporated by reference and shall be adhered to in order and improvement • Public Works and
to ensure that appropriate measures are incorporated into the design and plans. Utilities
construction of the project. Nothing in this mitigation measure shall preclude • Building Division
Page 30 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 91
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
the City Engineer and/or Chief Building Official from requiring additional The project
information be provided to determine compliance with applicable standards. geotechnical engineer
The project geotechnical engineer shall review the project plans and shall inspect the
specifications and submit a letter certifying to the City that the project plans construction work and
and specifications have been prepared in accordance with the geotechnical shall certify to the City,
recommendations for the project. The project geotechnical engineer or prior to issuance of a
personnel under their direct supervision shall inspect the construction of certificate of occupancy
geotechnical and/or geologic aspects of the project and shall submit a letter that the improvements
certifying to the City that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the have been constructed
geotechnical and geologic aspects of the project plans and specifications have in accordance with the
been appropriately constructed at the site and are acceptable to the project geotechnical
geotechnical engineer. specifications.
GEO-2a: The preconstruction design level geotechnical report, identified in Mitigation • Compliance with • Applicant/
Measure GEO--1, shall include specific recommendations to mitigate surface approved erosion Contractor/
erosion. The project geotechnical engineer or personnel under their direct control plan. Geotechnical
supervision shall inspect the construction of geotechnical and/or geologic Engineer
aspects of fill placement and compaction and surface drainage systems of cut • Public Works and
and fill slopes to ensure that the geotechnical recommendations associated Utilities
with mitigating surface soil erosion are properly implemented during • Building Division
construction.At a minimum, 1)slope inclinations shall be no steeper than 3:1
(horizontal to vertical), unless the project engineering geologist specifically
indicates that a steeper slope would perform satisfactorily over the long term,
2)fill slope requirements shall include a process of overbuilding the fill on the
slope and shaving it back to expose a well compacted fill surface that is less
susceptible to surface erosion,and 3)the project civil engineer shall check the
final grading of the site and the elevations of the surface drainage systems to
confirm that the grading contractor graded the site and constructed surface
improvement in accordance with the approved grading plans. If the project
engineering geologist elects to use a slope design that is steeper than 3:1, a
slope stability analysis shall be prepared to show that a suitable factor of
safety will be achieved with the proposed design.The acceptance of the slope
Page 31 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 92
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
stability analysis shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer and/or Chief Building Officials.
GEO-2b: The project geotechnical engineer shall review the geotechnical aspects of the . Incorporate • Applicant/
SWPPP and,where applicable,shall provide comments to the Qualified SWPPP geotechnical Contractor/
and fill slopes are properly incorporated into the SWPPP and/or a project recommendations into Geotechnical
specific operations and maintenance plan. As a minimum, the geotechnical project construction Engineer
aspects of the SWPPP shall include a requirement to check the condition of and improvement • Public Works and
the slope at the beginning of the first rainy season after the completion of plans. Utilities
grading and periodic inspections until surface vegetation has been fully • Building Division
established on the exposed slopes.
Page 32 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 93
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
GEO-3a: Where landslide mitigation is required under Mitigation Measure GEC--1a,the • Incorporate • Applicant/
project geotechnical engineer or personnel under their direct supervision shall geotechnical Contractor/
inspect the excavation and grading associated with the landslide removal recommendations into Geotechnical
and/or stabilization work to ensure that the geotechnical recommendations project construction Engineer
associated with mitigating landslide hazards are properly implemented during and improvement • Public Works and
construction. plans. Utilities
The project geotechnical engineer shall evaluate Landslides B, G, H, L, N. 0, • Building Division
and R, which have a potential to adversely impact the foundations of
footbridges and/or the loop trail pavement. As a minimum, the project
geotechnical engineer shall establish an inspection and maintenance program
to ensure that any damage to the planned footbridge foundations and loop
trail improvements due to landslide movements are identified and repaired.
GEO-3b: The project geotechnical engineer,project engineering geologist,or personnel • Incorporate • Applicant/
under their direct supervision shall inspect all cut slopes focusing on evidence geotechnical Contractor/
of potential instability. If areas of adverse bedrock structure are encountered, recommendations into Geotechnical
then the project geotechnical engineer and/or project engineering geologist project construction Engineer
shall develop remedial measures for these slopes and the grading contractor and improvement • Public Works and
shall implement the remedial activity, under the direction and supervision of plans. Utilities
project geotechnical engineer and/or engineering geologist, and acceptable • Building Division
by the City engineer.
GEO-4a: A preconstruction geotechnical report shall be prepared for the Davidon (28- • Incorporate • Applicant/
Lot) Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project geotechnical Contractor/
component,as previously discussed in Mitigation Measure GEO-1a.Specific to recommendations into Geotechnical
site geology, bedrock shear, settlement, and expansive soil, the project project construction Engineer
geotechnical engineer shall confirm that the conclusions and all applicable and improvement • Public Works and
recommendations previously presented in the 2015 design-level geotechnical plans. Utilities
report are still applicable for the design and construction of the Davidon (28- • Building Division
Lot) Residential Project component and the Putnam Park Extension Project
component
Page 33 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 94
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
GEO-4b: As a minimum, cut lots that have subgrades exposing bedrock shall be over- • Incorporate • Applicant/
excavated and recompacted to a minimum depth of three feet,and backfilled geotechnical Contractor/
as described below, unless the project geotechnical engineer provides project recommendations into Geotechnical
specific alternative recommendations to mitigate the potential for differential project construction Engineer
settlement associated with variable settlement and swell behavior between and improvement • Public Works and
bedrock and compacted engineered fill.The exposed surface shall be scarified plans. Utilities
to a depth of about 12 inches, moisture-conditioned to not less than three • Building Division
percent over optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction.
Excavation deeper than the above recommendations may be required to
expose competent material under conditions where soft or saturated soil is
encountered. The excavation depth will be determined in the field as part of
the geotechnical analysis required under Mitigation Measure GEC-1a.
Project site grades shall be designed to slope away from the proposed
structures,and water from roof drains shall be directed to suitable outlets. Fill
slopes comprised of low to moderately expansive soil shall be evaluated for
stability(see Mitigation Measures GE01a and GEC-3a).Additional mitigations
to reduce the impact of expansive soils on the proposed residences shall
include:
a) Moisture conditioning and re-compacting low to moderately expansive soil.
b) Placing non-expansive fill beneath the homes and rigid surface improvements.
c) Designing foundations to resist or tolerate differential movement of
moderately expansive soil.
GEO-6a: The project Applicants shall identify a qualified paleontologist prior to any • Approval of project • Applicant
demolition, excavation, or construction. The City shall approve the selected paleontologist • Planning Division
project paleontologist prior to issuance of the demolition permit. The • Qualified
paleontologist shall attend the pre-grading meeting to inform the paleontologist
contractor(s) how to recognize paleontological resources in the soil during
grading activities.The prime construction contractor and any subcontractor(s)
Page 34 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 95
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
shall be informed on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly
destroying paleontological resources or removing paleontological resources
from the project site.
GEO-6b: If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of site • Recommendation by • Applicant
development activities, work in that area shall be halted and the selected qualified paleontologist • Planning Division
project paleontologist,as outlined in Mitigation Measure GEO-6a above,shall of appropriate • Qualified
be notified of the find to determine the significance of the find and to mitigation measures paleontologist
recommend appropriate mitigation measures. Recommendations shall be • Approval of Treatment
presented for City approval in a Treatment and Recovery Plan. The selected and Recovery Plan
project paleontologist shall have the authority to temporarily divert or
redirect grading to allow time to evaluate any exposed fossil material.
GEO-6c: If the selected project paleontologist determines that the resource is • Recommendation by • Applicant
significant, then any scientifically significant specimens shall be properly qualified paleontologist • Planning Division
collected by the project paleontologist. During collecting activities,contextual of appropriate . Qualified
stratigraphic data shall also be collected. The data will include lithologic mitigation measures paleontologist
descriptions, photographs, measured stratigraphic sections,and field notes.
Scientifically significant specimens shall be prepared to the point of
identification (not exhibition), stabilized, identified, and offered for curation
to a suitable repository that has a retrievable storage system, such as the
University of California, Berkeley, Museum of Paleontology.
The selected project paleontologist shall prepare a final report at the end of
the earthmoving activities. The report shall include an itemized inventory of
recovered fossils and appropriate stratigraphic and locality data. The project
paleontologist shall send one copy of the report to the City of Petaluma
Community Development Department; another copy should accompany any
fossils,along with field logs and photographs,to the designated repository.
RPT GEO-1: To reduce the potential risks of regional park trail damage as a result • Development of a long- • Applicant
of earthquake induced landslide movement,the project geotechnical engineer term maintenance plan • Planning Division
shall develop and submit to the Sonoma County a long-term maintenance • Sonoma County
Page 35 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 96
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
plan, including criteria for inspecting and maintaining the planned regional
park trail improvements.
RPT GEO-2: If paleontological resources are encountered anywhere in the project . Recommendation by • Applicant
site, all work should be halted in the vicinity and a paleontologist consulted qualified paleontologist . Planning Division
immediately. of appropriate . Qualified
mitigation measures Paleontologist
Page 36 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 97
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HYD-1a: Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the City of • Prepare SWPPP • Applicant
Petaluma shall verify that the Applicants have prepared a SWPPP in accordance . Incorporate measures • Planning Division
with the requirements of the statewide Construction General Permit.The SWPPP into project
shall be designed to address the following objectives:(1)all pollutants and their construction document
sources, including sources of sediment associated with construction,
construction site erosion, and all other activities associated with construction
activity are controlled; (2)where not otherwise required to be under a Regional
Water Quality Control Board permit, all non-stormwater discharges are
identified and either eliminated, controlled, or treated; (3) site BMPs are
effective and result in the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater
discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges from construction
activity;and(4)stabilization BMPs are installed to reduce or eliminate pollutants
after construction is completed. The SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified
SWPPP developer.The SWPPP shall include the minimum BMPs required for the
identified Risk Level. BMP implementation shall be consistent with the BMP
requirements in the most recent version of the California Stormwater Quality
Association Stormwater Best Management Handbook—Construction or the
Caltrans Stormwater Quality Handbook Construction Site BMPs Manual.
HYD-1b: In areas within 50 feet of sensitive habitat areas, construction activities should • Implementation of • Applicant
be planned to avoid, to the extent feasible, disturbance of riparian vegetation, SWPPP • Planning Division
including trees and their root systems. The SWPPP shall specifically address . Incorporate measures
special considerations for controlling sediment and other pollutants within these into project
areas, through additional erosion control measures (such as berms and construction document
temporary retention/settling basins that divert runoff away from the creek
banks, limiting the use of heavy construction vehicles within the riparian zone,
or conserving and replacing topsoil during grading near the riparian zone to
speed up the re-establishment of stabilizing vegetation), to limit grading near
riparian areas to occur only during the dry-season. Erosion control measures
shall also include staged grading to reduce the area of exposed soil at any one
Page 37 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 98
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
period of time, and/or other measures specifically tailored to riparian and
sensitive areas.
HYD-1c: The project shall implement appropriate post-construction stormwater • Incorporate measures • Applicant
treatment measures to reduce water quality and hydromodification impacts to into project • Planning Division
downstream reaches, as required by the current post construction controls construction document
requirements of the Small MS4 General Permit. Upon completion of the final
project design, the Applicants shall provide documentation to the City of
stormwater management measures that show compliance with the Small MS4
General Permit. The report shall delineate individual drainage management
areas (DMAs) within the project site and provide analysis to show compliance
with the volumetric or flow-based treatment criteria as described in the Small
MS4 General Permit and outlined in the 2019 BASMAA (2019) guidance
document. The report shall also include design calculations that show post-
project runoff for the 2-year, 24-hour storm event does not exceed pre-project
flow for each DMA, and that each DMA has appropriate stormwater quality
treatment based on flow- or volumetric-based calculation, as outlined in the
Small MS4 General Permit and in compliance with the 2019 BASMAA guidance
document (2019). The final documentation shall be submitted to the City for
approval before the beginning of grading.
HYD-1d:The proposed multi-use trails shall be designed to direct stormwater runoff away • Incorporate measures • Applicant
from Kelly Creek and D-Street tributary and/or to vegetated pervious areas not into project • Planning Division
susceptible to erosion.The path shall be designed to limit the amount of runoff construction document
concentrated from any one portion of the path in order to prevent gullying. In
areas close to Kelly Creek or otherwise not suitable for distributed discharge of
runoff,stormwater treatment measures such as swales shall be implemented to
protect the creek.
HYD-3: Stormwater outfalls to Kelly Creek and the D Street tributary shall be designed • Incorporate measures • Applicant
to reduce the potential to cause bank instability. Outfall locations near (or into project • Planning Division
especially across from)existing or potential bank instabilities shall be avoided so construction document
that outflows do not exacerbate erosion.Appropriate energy dissipation,such as
Page 38 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 99
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
boulder aprons, biostabilization, or directing outfalls in a downstream rather
than cross-channel direction, shall be incorporated to reduce the potential to
cause erosion.
HYD-4a: Prior to final map approval, the Applicants shall submit final detention design • Incorporate measures • Applicant
that shows that appropriate controls have been included to ensure that the post- into project • Planning Division
project 10- and 100-year peak flows will not exceed pre-project peaks. construction document
Hydrologic analyses and final detention designs shall be consistent with the
standards outlined in the Sonoma Water's Flood Management Design Manual,
adopted May 19, 2020. Total detention volume may be less than the volume
projected in the preliminary hydrologic analysis if final analysis shows
appropriate compliance through integrated LID/water quality
treatment/detention features. Final hydrologic analysis and detention sizing
shall include potential increases in peak flow due to all new impervious surfaces
associated with the proposed project,including the parking areas.
HYD-4b:The project Applicants shall prepare and execute, in coordination with the City • Incorporate measures • Applicant
Engineer or other privately funded and operated maintenance mechanism which into project • Planning Division
ensures that maintenance of all detention facilities will be provided as necessary construction document
to continuously provide the required volume storage in a 10-year storm and in a
100-year storm,throughout the life of the project, and shall include a financing
mechanism acceptable to the City Engineer to ensure that the required
maintenance will be performed.
HYD-4c: The project Applicants shall design,in coordination with the City Engineer,onsite • Incorporate measures • Applicant
detention facilities sufficient to detain on-site and release runoff from storm into project • Planning Division
events such that any runoff temporarily detained on-site is released either construction document
before or after the expected peak flood flow of the Petaluma River and that any
release of runoff temporarily detained on-site does not contribute to an increase
in peak flood periods on the Petaluma River. Prior to final map approval, the
project Applicants' final stormwater detention design calculations shall be
subject to review by the City's stormwater consultant and City Engineer. The
Page 39 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 100
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
project Applicants shall be responsible for funding all costs and providing the
required technical information to the City.
HYD-6: Pedestrian bridges across Kelly Creek shall be designed to fully span the channel • Incorporate measures • Applicant
in order to reduce the potential to impede streamflow. If full-span lengths are into project • Planning Division
not feasible, bridge supports shall be designed to maximize the natural channel construction document
cross section area in order reduce the potential obstruction to in-stream flow.
NOISE
NOI-1: The proposed project shall implement the following control measures during • Conduct construction • Applicant
construction. in conformance with • Planning Division
a) Noise-generating construction activities shall be limited to daytime, weekday measures herein. • Building Division
hours (7 AM to 6 PM) and 9 AM to 5 PM on weekends and holidays. When • Incorporate into
construction is occurring within 100 feet of existing residences, then project design and
construction shall occur between 9 AM and 5 PM and shall be prohibited on construction
Sundays and Holidays. documents.
b) High noise-producing activities,such as excavation and grading and construction ' Applicant shall provide
finishing, shall be scheduled between the hours of 8 AM and 5 PM to minimize for periodic inspection
disruption on sensitive uses. during construction to
c) All stationary noise generating equipment that generates noise levels in excess ensure that measures
of 65 dBA Leq shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptors. If re- are in place.
locating stationary equipment is not feasible, the equipment shall be shielded
from noise sensitive receptors by using temporary walls,sound curtains,or other
similar devices to reduce noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors to less than
65 dBA Leq.
d) The construction contractor shall implement feasible noise controls to minimize
equipment noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Feasible noise controls
include improved mufflers,use of intake silencers,ducts,engine enclosures,and
acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds.
e) Equipment used for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically
powered impact tools (e.g., jack hammers) wherever possible to avoid noise
Page 40 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 101
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools.
Where use of pneumatically-powered tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler
on the compressed air exhaust shall be used.A muffler could lower noise levels
from the exhaust by up to about 10 dBA.External jackets on the tools themselves
shall be used where feasible;this could achieve a reduction of five dBA.Quieter
procedures shall be used (such as drilling rather than impact equipment)
wherever feasible.
f) The construction contractor shall implement appropriate additional noise
reduction measures that include shutting off idling equipment after 5 minutes
(as feasible) and notifying adjacent residences (at least one time) in advance of
construction work.
g) The construction contractor shall not stage equipment within 200 feet of the
existing residences adjacent to the project site.
h) The contractor shall minimize use of vehicle backup alarms.A common approach
to minimizing the use of backup alarms is to design the construction site with a
circular flow pattern that minimizes backing up of trucks and other heavy
equipment. Another approach to reducing the intrusion of backup alarms is to
require all equipment on the site to be equipped with ambient sensitive alarms.
With this type of alarm,the alarm sound is automatically adjusted based on the
ambient noise.
i) Construction worker's radios shall be controlled so as to be inaudible beyond the
limits of the project site boundaries.
j) Heavy equipment,such as paving and grading equipment,shall be stored on-site
whenever possible to minimize the need for extra heavy truck trips on local
streets.
k) Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification in writing
must be provided to residents within 300 feet of the project site, disclosing the
construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would be
occurring throughout the duration of the construction period.
1) The construction contractor shall designate a city-approved "disturbance
Page 41 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 102
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints
about construction noise.The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause
of the noise complaint(e.g.,starting too early,bad muffler,etc.)and shall require
that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented.
The construction contractor shall conspicuously post a telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent
to neighbors regarding the construction schedule.
NOI-2a: Heavy construction equipment shall be prohibited from operating within 100 • Conduct construction • Applicant
feet of an existing residence between the hours of 5:00 PM and 9:00 AM and on in conformance with • Planning Division
holidays. measures herein. • Building Division
• Incorporate into
project design and
construction
documents.
• Applicant shall provide
for periodic inspection
during construction to
ensure that measures
are in place.
NOI-2b: Operation of heavy equipment shall be prohibited within 20 feet of the barn • Conduct construction • Applicant
complex.Temporary reinforcements/stabilization measures shall be installed at in conformance with • Planning Division
the barn structures,as needed,to minimize vibration damage. measures herein. • Building Division
• Incorporate into
project design and
construction
documents.
• Applicant shall provide
for periodic inspection
during construction to
ensure that measures
are in place.
Page 42 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 103
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
TRANS-5: A construction management plan shall be prepared for review and approval • Incorporate into • Applicant
by the City of Petaluma Public Works Department. The plan shall include at project design and • Planning Division
least the following items: construction
a) Development of a construction truck route that would appear on all documents
construction plans to limit truck and auto traffic on nearby streets.
b) Comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck
trips and deliveries to avoid peak traffic hours, detour signs if required, lane
closure procedures if required, sidewalk closure procedures if required, cones
for drivers,and designated construction access routes.
c) Evaluation of the need to provide flaggers or temporary traffic control at key
intersections along the truck route(s).
d) Notification procedures for adjacent property owners and public safety
personnel regarding schedules when major deliveries, detours, and lane
closures would occur.
e) Location of construction staging areas for materials, equipment, and vehicles
if there is insufficient staging area within the work zone of the proposed
project.
f) Identification of truck routes for movement of construction vehicles that would
minimize impacts on vehicular and pedestrian traffic, circulation and safety;
provision for monitoring surface streets used for truck movement so that any
damage and debris attributable to the proposed project's construction trucks
can be identified and corrected by the proposed project applicant.
g) A process for responding to and tracking complaints pertaining to construction
activity, including identification of an on-site complaint manager.
h) Documentation of road pavement conditions for all routes that would be used
by construction vehicles both before and after proposed project construction.
Page 43 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 104
DocuSign Envelope ID: FA7C658B-EC63-4EAD-B9FC-4A42C70F1D1F
Scott Ranch Project-City of Petaluma Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SCOTT RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COMPLETION OF
MITIGATION MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
PARTY DATE
ACTIVITY COMPLETED
Roads found to have been damaged by construction vehicles shall be repaired
to the level at which they existed prior to construction of the proposed project.
UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS
UTL-3a: Prior to issuance of building permits,the project shall be required to upsize the • Incorporate into project • Applicant
D Street sewer between Grossland Way to the manhole west of 10th Street, design and construction • Planning Division
subject to the review and approval by the City Public Works and Utilities documents
Department.
UTL-3b: Mitigation Measure AIR-2, Mitigation Measures CUL-2a through 2c, Mitigation • Incorporate into project • Applicant
Measure CUL-3, and Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 and NOISE-2a shall be design and construction • Planning Division
implemented in conjunction with the sewer main upgrade project. documents
WILDFIRE
See Mitigation Measures GEO-1a, GEC-1b, GEO-3a, GEC-3b, HYD-4a, HYD-4b,
and HYD 6.
Page 44 July 2022
Planning Commission Resolution No.2022-11 Page 105