Cities Index.
E - Cottages Neighborhood Meeting Notes

Cotati City Council
February 27, 2024

Document
E - Cottages Neighborhood Meeting Notes
Meeting
February 27, 2024
Body
Cotati City Council
Original file
78 KB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on cotaticity.primegov.com. That file is the official record.

City of Cotati
Sonoma County, California
________________________________________________________________ 201 W. Sierra Ave, Cotati, CA 94931 | (707) 792-4600 | www.cotaticity.org | @cityofcotati

MEMORANDUM
July 28, 2023
Listed below are the comments and concerns regarding the proposed Cotati Village project that were raised at the neighborhood meetings held at the Cottages Community Building on July 18 and July 24.

1. Concerns over increased Ford Lane traffic volumes, including potential use as a “cutthrough” street to access W. Cotati Ave intersection were voiced by several residents.

Several requests for traffic safety mitigation measures to be installed along Ford Lane were made, potentially including speed bumps, limited access between Ford Lane and the Villages site, traffic calming measures be included in the improvements along the southern side of Ford Lane.

2. Several residents asked if a different zoning could be applied to Cotati Village site instead of the CG zoning. Staff noted that any other zoning would conflict with the General Plan.

3. “Per 2020 Census data,” Cotati or Sonoma County (unclear which) emergency response times is 66% of average” and new residents will impact this response time further.

4. Concerns over increased traffic on Alder and safety impacts associated with increased volume were raised by several residents. “Alder is substandard and dangerous.” Several residents want sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides and increased police patrols.

5. Residents requested the design be revised to relocate trash enclosures further away from Ford Lane.

6. Concerns over scale and massing of proposed 3-story apartment buildings and their proximity to 2-story cottages were voiced by multiple residents.

7. Various concerns over apartment home (rental) vs. single family home (ownership) and impacts to Cottages residents and property values were voiced by multiple residents.

8. Concerns were raised regarding the parking easement along Ford Lane. Some felt the easement change from a 15-foot easement to an 8-foot easement was not properly initiated in 2004 because the residents living in the Cottages at the time did not vote on the change. Others felt “2003 15-foot Easement and 2004 8-foot Easement dimensions are meant to be additive for a total of 23-feet, not one replacing the other”.

City staff committed to a legal opinion on this proposition/issue and the other easement rights from the City Attorney be presented to decision makers with the project analysis.

9. Cottages residents asked if Alder Avenue can have a weight limit and exclude semi-truck traffic? Staff committed to exploring this request.

10. The section of Alder Avenue in the County needs significant improvement/maintenance.

11. Cottages residents identify that the bridge at Alder/Helman intersection is a pinch-point and creates a dangerous intersection.

12. Residents requested some type of separation between Cottages project and proposed Village project on the south side of Ford Lane. This includes rearranging the parking so that Village residents park on Village property and not Ford Lane.

13. Some residents asked if the density of the project could be reduced.

14. Cottages residents are interested in access to some amenities as were to be included in the previous Cotati Cottages project approval.

15. Cottages residents are interested in the 36 non-exclusive, night and weekend spaces identified in the existing easements be made exclusive and permanent parking spaces for Cottages residents. City staff communicated that, based on the dimensions and other technical aspects of the easement, staff finds that 22 spaces would be a fair number of spaces to dedicate to Cottages residents in-lieu of the 36 non-exclusive spaces currently identified in the easement language.
******

← All documents from this meeting