Exhibit C - Previously Approved MND — Santa Rosa City Council, June 3, 2025

DUTTON AVENUE RESIDENCES
3150 Dutton Ave.

Assessor’s Parcel No.: 043-133-013
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Lead Agency:

City of Santa Rosa
Planning and Economic Development Department
100 Santa Rosa Ave., Rm. 3
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Contact: Patrick Streeter, Senior Planner
Date: September 27, 2018

EXHIBT C

NOTICE OF INTENT

DATE: September 27, 2018

TO: Public Agencies, Organizations and Interested Parties

FROM: Patrick Streeter, Senior Planner

SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION – DUTTON AVENUE RESIDENCES – 3150

DUTTON AVENUE, SANTA ROSA, CA

Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the “Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970” as amended to date, this is to advise you that the Department of Community Development of the City of Santa Rosa has prepared an Initial Study on the following project:

Project Name:

Dutton Avenue Residences

Location:

The site, located on the eastside of Dutton Avenue, approximately 440 ft. south of the intersection of Bellevue Avenue and Dutton Avenue. The site address is 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California
APN: 043-133-013

Property Description:

The subject property is ±5.95 acres in size, flat, undeveloped land with minimal on-site vegetation. No improvements have been made to the site. The site is surrounded by street, rail, and developed properties.

Land Use and Zoning:

The project site is designated as Medium Density Residential 8 – 18 units/acre under the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035, and zoned R-3-18.

Project Description – General:

The proposed 3150 Dutton Avenue development is a multi-family residential community consisting of 107 apartment units. The apartments will include 33 one-bedroom, 64 two-bedroom and 10 three-

bedroom units within five buildings. Ancillary on-site uses for the benefit of the tenants’ lifestyle consist of a leasing office/ internet cafe, club house, community kitchen, wine storage, fitness center, outdoor recreation area including a swimming pool, BBQ area, fireplace, and bocce ball court and a community garden. 237 spaces parking spaces will be provided, 107 of which are covered spaces, and 102 bicycle storage spaces.

Entitlement Applications from the city of Santa Rosa:

Applications necessary for the processing of the Dutton Avenue Development project in the R-3-18 district with the city of Santa Rosa are:

• Design Review

Environmental Issues:

The proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level of non-significance. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration document has been prepared in accordance with Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Furthermore, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration will serve as the environmental compliance document required under CEQA for any permits/approvals required by a responsible agency.

A 20-day (twenty-day) public review period shall commence on September 28, 2018. Written comments must be sent to the City of Santa Rosa, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue, Room 3, Santa Rosa CA 95402 by October 18, 2018. The City of Santa Rosa Design Review Board will hold public hearings on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and project merits on October 18, 2018, at or after 4:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa. Correspondence and comments can be delivered to Patrick Streeter, Senior Planner, phone: (707) 543-4323, email: [email protected]

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

1. Project Title: 3150 Dutton Avenue Residences

2. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Santa Rosa Planning & Economic Development Department
100 Santa Rosa Ave. (P.O. Box 1678)
Santa Rosa, CA 95402-1678

3. Contact Person & Phone Number: Patrick Streeter, Senior Planner Phone Number: (707) 543-4323
Email: [email protected]

4. Project Location: The site is located in the City of Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California at 3150 Dutton
Avenue, Santa Rosa, California
APN: 043-133-013

5. Project Sponsor’s Name & Mark M. Garay, President Address: Paladin Funding, Inc.
430 Ridge Road
Tiburon, CA 94920

6. Project Land Use Consultant: Jean Kapolchok
J. Kapolchok & Associates
843 Second Street
Santa Rosa, CA 95404

7. General Plan: Medium Density Residential: 8 – 18 units/acre

8. Zoning: R-3-18

9. Description of Project:

The proposed 3150 Dutton Avenue development is a multi-family residential community consisting of 107 apartment units. The apartments will include 33 one-bedroom, 64 two-bedroom and 10 three-bedroom units within five buildings. Ancillary on-site uses for the benefit of the tenants’ lifestyle consist of a leasing office/ internet cafe, club house, community kitchen, wine storage, fitness center, outdoor recreation area including a swimming pool, BBQ area, fireplace, and bocce ball court and a community garden. 237 spaces parking spaces will be provided, 107 of which are covered spaces, and 102 bicycle storage spaces.

Applications necessary for processing of the 3150 Dutton Avenue Residences in the R-3-18, Medium Density District are:

• Design Review: Medium Density Multi-Family Residential Apartments are a permitted use in the R-3-18 zoning district.
4 10. Surrounding Land and Land Uses:

The site, located on the eastside of Dutton Avenue, approximately 440 ft. south of the intersection of Bellevue Avenue and Dutton Avenue, is situated in a mixed-use area consisting of light industrial and multi-family residential uses. Industrial warehouse uses are to the north and south of the subject property; Dutton Avenue and vacant, Medium Density Residential designated and zoned land is to the west; Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) rail tracks and single-story, attached, low to medium density residential are to the east.

11. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required:
• City of Santa Rosa Building Department
• City of Santa Rosa Engineering Development Division
• City of Santa Rosa Fire Department

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Project Description

2. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected

3. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

I. Aesthetics

II. Agricultural and Forested Resources

III. Air Quality

IV. Biological Resources

V. Cultural Resources

VI. Geology and Soils

VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

IX. Hydrology and Water Quality

X. Land Use Planning

XI. Mineral Resources

XII. Noise

XIII. Population and Housing

XIV. Public Services

XV. Recreation

XVI. Transportation/Traffic

XVII. Utilities and Service Systems

XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance

4. Source Documents

5. Applicant’s Signature and Determination

6 7

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Location:

The subject property is ±5.95 acres in size and identified as Assessor’s Parcel number 043-133-013.

Prior to annexation to the city of Santa Rosa, the site was created by a minor subdivision (Parcel Map # 6353; September 1980). The site is located in the southwest quadrant of the City of Santa Rosa, on the east side of Dutton Avenue, approximately 440 ft. south of the intersection of Bellevue Avenue and Dutton Avenue. The site is accessed off of Dutton Avenue. The address is 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa.

Topography and Natural Features:

The subject property is flat, undeveloped land with minimal on-site vegetation. No improvements have been made to the site. The site is surrounded by street, rail, and developed properties.

8 Surrounding Land and Land Uses:

The site is located on the east side of Dutton Avenue approximately 440 ft. south of the intersection of Bellevue Avenue and Dutton Avenue. The parcel is surrounded by a mix of industrial and residential land uses. Business Park development exists north and south of the site; Dutton Avenue street improvements and vacant medium density residential land and Storage Master self-storage is to the west; SMART rail tracks and single-story attached multi-family residential developments are to the east.

Existing Physical Conditions:

Existing Uses
The site is undeveloped.

Physical Improvements
The site is unimproved excepting a cyclone/cyclone with wood slats fence around the entire perimeter of the property.

Land Use and Zoning:

The project is designated as Medium Density Residential under the General Plan, and zoned R-3-

18. Housing densities within the Medium Density Land Use category range from 8.0 – 18.0 units per gross acre. The land use designation and zoning district permit a range of housing types, including single family attached and multifamily developments, and is intended for specific areas where higher density is appropriate.

Project Objectives:

It is the objective of the 3150 Dutton Avenue development project to provide the following:
• A well-designed ±134,154 sf. medium density residential vibrant lifestyle community for residents.
• A well-designed lifestyle community, centered around an active gathering area with a swimming pool, outdoor gathering and BBQ areas, bocce ball court and open-green space for residents to enjoy.
• A well-designed space, which promotes sustainability and further reinforce the sense of community by including common work and leisure spaces such as; health center, internet café, communal computer work spaces, conference room, community kitchen, and a community garden along the eastern border of property.
• A well-designed medium density residential development whose residence will become users of public transportation, especially SMART and the bicycle/pedestrian path along the SMART train rail corridor.

9 Project Description
The proposed 3150 Dutton Avenue development proposes a gated residential community of 107 apartments. The apartments will include 33 one-bedroom, 64 two-bedroom, and 10 three-bedroom units within 5 buildings. The building complex consists of 1 two-story, 3 three-story, and 1 mixed three and four-story building. Amenities include a leasing office/ internet-cafe, club house, community kitchen, wine storage, and fitness center; as well as public gathering spaces, which include a swimming pool, BBQ areas, fireplace, and bocce ball area. The entrance to the property is off Dutton Avenue. Residents will enter through secured gates. There will be vertical transportation through elevator in the four-story structure and a series of bridges connecting the buildings to promote occupancy by the move down generation of baby boomers.

The project proposes 237 parking spaces onsite, consisting of 130 uncovered and 107 covered spaces. The proposed 237 parking spaces exceed the City’s requirements by 8 spaces. In addition, 102 bicycle storage lockers will be provided.

The buildings are contemporary in design. Strong color contrast is used to provide interest and articulation. Building heights range from 22 ft. for the two-story building; 32 ft. for the three-story and 42 ft. for the four-story portion of the ¾-story building. Building materials are painted cement plaster, Hardie-Board siding, metal balconies and standing seam metal roofs. All noise attenuation measures recommended in the acoustical analysis prepared for the project by Illingworth & Rodkin will be incorporated in the project design and is made a part hereto of this project description. All parking lot areas will be landscaped according to the city’s Design Guidelines, the main entry-way will be tree-lined, ornamental landscaping will be used throughout the recreation/public gathering areas and a series of community garden plots are provided along the entire eastern boundary of the property. Street trees as required by the city’s Recreation and Parks Department will also be provided. The landscape plan will comply with the city’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) requirements. As part of this project description, the small, isolated wetland that exists in the rear portion of the property will be completely avoided.

The Project will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) measures as called for in the City of Santa Rosa’s Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP). The City’s SUSMP requires the inclusion of LID features to capture and infiltrate small storm event volumes on-site.

The Project’s Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan will incorporate LID measures into the Project design including detention and infiltration through volume capture media mixture under the drainage swales, bio-retention, rain gardens, stenciled storm water inlets and interceptor trees.

These features are described in detail in Preliminary Storm Water Mitigation Plan prepared by Adobe & Associates.

Green Technologies
Energy and water efficient design measures will be incorporated throughout the Project including the installation of several electric charging stations in the parking area and water efficient landscaping consisting of drought tolerant plant species separated into hydro-zones for irrigation needs. Planting plans will call for new trees and shrubs to compliment the community gathering area and main entry- way. A community garden area is also provided. The Project will include high efficiency lighting, and low-flow plumbing faucets and fixtures. The applicant will also utilize a construction waste recycling program during construction to minimize waste to the extent practicable.
10 The 3150 Dutton Avenue Project incorporates the applicable policy measures contained in the Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan. These include the following:

Policy 1.1.1: Comply with CALGreen Tier 1 Standards: The Project is designed to comply with State Energy requirements for Title 24, City of Santa Rosa’s CALGreen requirements and CALGreen Tier 1 Standards in effect at time of permit submission. Such standards have been incorporated into site development, building design and landscaping.

Policy 1.1.3: After 2020, all new development will utilize zero net electricity: The Project is being constructed prior to 2020. Therefore, this policy does not apply.

Policy 1.3.1: Real time Energy Monitors: The Project will include energy monitors to track energy use.

Policy 1.4.2: Comply with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Santa Rosa Code Section 17-

24.020: No trees will be removed.

Policy 1.4.3: Provide public and private trees in compliance with the Zoning Code: As shown on the Landscape Plan, the project includes the planting of trees, both public (street trees) and private (on-site). The Landscape design is in compliance with the Santa Rosa Zoning Code, Santa Rosa Design Guidelines, and Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Policy 2.1.3: Pre-wire and pre-plumb for solar thermal or PV systems: This is currently being investigated and cannot be committed to.

Policy 3.1.2: Supports implementation of station plans and corridor plans: The Project is not within a Station Area Plan or within a Corridor Plan. The Project does support alternative modes of transit by providing 102 bicycle lockers and several electrical-vehicle charging stations. It is hoped that additional bus service will be provided to this area of the city.

Policy 3.2.1: Provide on-site services such as ATMs or dry-cleaning to site users: The Project is a residential project and does not supply such uses. Furthermore, the provision of such uses may conflict with the zoning district.

Policy 3.2.2: Improve non-vehicular network to promote walking, biking: The Project is designed to promote walking and biking through the provision of bicycle lockers, sidewalks and bicycle lands as required along Dutton Avenue. It is a project objective for the residents to utilize area bicycle and pedestrian paths, which includes pedestrian/bicycle pathway along the SMART corridor.

Policy 3.2.3: Support mixed use, higher density development near services: The Project is a medium density residential project consistent with the City of Santa Rosa General Plan and the R-3- 18 zoning district.
11 Policy 3.3.1: Provide affordable housing near transit. The project is a medium density residential rental project. The Project will be responsible for the payment of any required affordable housing impact fees.

Policy 3.5.1: Unbundle parking from property costs: This measure is related to affordable housing projects and is therefore not applicable to the Project.

Policy 3.6.1: Install calming features to improve pedestrian/bike experience: The Project will be responsible for improvements along its Dutton Avenue frontage.

Policy 4.1.1: Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: Any required improvements along Dutton Avenue will be done in accordance with city standards.

Policy 4.1.2: Install bicycle parking consistent with regulations: 102 bicycle lockers will be provided. Bicycle parking shall be provided per the city’s Zoning code.

Policy 4.1.3: Provide bicycle safety training to residents and employees: Policy so noted.

Policy 4.2.2: Provide safe spaces to wait for bus arrival: There is a bus stop within 0.5 miles of the project with sidewalks for the waiting patrons.

Policy 4.3.2: Work with large employers to provide rideshare programs: The project is a medium density residential project. This policy is not applicable. However, as a residential community car- sharing opportunities may present themselves.

Policy 4.3.3: Consider expanding employee programs promoting transit use: See comment above.

Policy 4.3.4: Provide awards for employee use of alternative commute options: See comment above.

Policy 4.3.5: Encourage new employers of 50+ provide subsidized transit passes: See comment above.

Policy 4.3.7: Provide space for additional park and ride lots: This policy is not applicable.

Policy 4.5.1: Include facilities for employees that promote telecommuting: This policy is not applicable.

Policy 5.1.2: Install electric vehicle charging equipment: Several electrical vehicles charging stations will be provided in the parking area.

Policy 5.2.1: Provide alternative fuels at new re-fueling stations: The Project is not a re-fueling station project. Therefore, this policy does not apply.

Policy 6.1.3: Increase diversion of construction waste: The contractor will divert construction waste to the extent commercially practicable and prepare a Construction Waste Management Plan for recycling and disposal of construction wastes.
12 Policy 7.1.1: Reduce potable water for outdoor landscaping: The Project landscaping will utilize low water use plants. Landscape irrigation will utilize drip systems using a smart controller. The Project will be compliant with the City of Santa Rosa’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO).

Policy 7.1.3: Use water meters which tract real-time water use. Such meters will be used.

Policy 7.3.2: Meet on-site meter separation requirements in locations with current or future recycle water capabilities: This policy will be adhered to.

Policy 8.1.3: Establish community gardens and urban farms: Community gardens have been incorporated into the Project’s design, subject to the approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency.

Policy 9.1.2: Provide outdoor outlets for charging lawn equipment: Policy noted.

Policy 9.1.3: Install low water use landscapes: Low water use landscapes will be used. The Project will be compliant with the City of Santa Rosa’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Policy 9.2.1: Minimize construction equipment idling time to 5 minutes or less: The developer/construction manager will condition contractor agreements to limit construction equipment idling time to 5 minutes or less, consistent with the City’s Standard Measures for Air Quality.

Policy 9.2.2: Maintain construction equipment per manufacturer’s specifications: The developer/construction manager will condition contractor agreements to require that all equipment used at the site be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

Policy 9.2.3: Limit Green House Gas (GHG) construction equipment by using electrified equipment or alternate fuel: The developer will include provisions in contractor agreements encouraging the use of electrified equipment or equipment using alternative fuels.

Circulation Improvement
As part of the project, the project applicant offers to install all-way stop controls, restripe the southbound Standish Avenue approach to include a left-turn lane and restripe the westbound Todd Road approach to include a right turn lane at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue. An encroachment permit will be filed with the County of Sonoma for the above described improvements. Evidence of an approved encroachment permit will be submitted to the City of Santa Rosa Economic Development and Planning Department and the Building Division prior to building permit issuance. The need for said improvement shall be negated if the intersection has been signalized or if signalization is immediately forth coming.

Construction Schedule
Construction would take approximately 18 months. Construction is anticipated to begin in the Spring of 2018 and be completed in Fall of 2019. External construction work would be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday-Friday and 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays or as allowed by the City’s Municipal Code Section 17-16.030. 13 City of Santa Rosa Entitlement Applications:

Design Review: Multi-family residential projects are permitted uses in the R-3-18 zoning district.

The project will require CEQA review and Design Review, only.

15 16

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?

b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?

d. Create a new source of substantial light
or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?

Assessment of Visual Change
The degree of visual change as a result of the Project was assessed based on: applicable city policies; and, the application of a visual assessment methodology utilized by the City of Santa Rosa in previous environmental assessment documents. This assessment is used to assist in the determination of potential aesthetic impact. In addition, an Aesthetic Analysis based on the CEQA Checklist prepared by Boulder Associates, Architects was used to assess potential aesthetic impacts. (Source 13)

Applicable General Plan Policies

The General Plan policies related to visual quality are found in the Urban Design and Transportation elements of the General Plan. The applicable policies are:

UD-A: Preserve and enhance Santa Rosa’s scenic character, including its natural waterways, hillsides, and distinctive districts.

UD-A-1: Maintain view corridors to natural ridgelines and landmarks, such as Taylor Mountain and Bennett Mountain.

UD-A-2: Strengthen and emphasize community focal points, visual landmarks, and features that contribute to the identity of Santa Rosa using design concepts and standards implemented through the Zoning Code, Design Guidelines, Preservation District Plans, Scenic Road policies, the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan, and the Citywide Creek Master Plan.

17 UD-A-5: Require superior site and architectural design of new development projects to improve the visual quality of the city.

UD-A-8: Maintain hillsides in the city as a scenic backdrop to urban development.

T-G: Identify, preserve, and enhance scenic roads throughout Santa Rosa in both rural and developed areas.

T-G-5: Retain existing trees and vegetation along scenic roads, as possible. Enhance roadway appearance through landscaping, using native plant material.

T-G-6: Provide large setbacks from scenic roads, as possible, to avoid encroachment of buildings on the view of the roadway.

T-G-7: Provide bikeways along scenic roads, where right-of-way exists or where its acquisition will not jeopardize roadway character.

T-G-8: Disallow on-street parking along scenic roads.

Visual Assessment Methodology: In order to assess visual change, factors or “categories” and ways by which to measure change within these selected categories were established.

The categories used to assess visual change:

1. Visual Contrast between existing conditions and post-project.

2. Scenic view obstruction.

3. Degradation of the visual quality of the area.

4. An increase in light and glare that would result in a safety hazard or nuisance to surrounding land uses.

The units of measurement employed to determine impact:

1. Visual Contrast: Strong Visual Contrast would exist if the project resulted in:
• Line of major ridgeline is altered and not consistent with surrounding ridgelines. • Minor ridgelines are eliminated.
• Inconsistent color with adjacent landscape character. • Elimination of landscape texture created by exposed soils or removal of vegetation. • Scale and mass of project is grossly incompatible with the surrounding environment.

2. Scenic View Obstruction:
• Obstruction of foreground or middle ground views of scenic resources, such as steep slopes, distinctive rock outcrops, pronounce ridgelines, mature stands of native, heritage or natural groves of trees.

3. Degradation of Visual Quality:
• Severe alteration or displacement of scenic view-sheds.

18 4. Light and Glare:
• Creation of a new source of substantial light or glare, adversely affecting day or nighttime views of the area.

Discussion:

I. (a) No Impact: The project site is zoned Multi-Family Residential; 18-units/acre (R-3-18) and designated Medium Density Residential in the City’s General Plan.

The project is situated in a mixed land use area of establish industrial/business park development; established single-story attached multi-family residential and ±15.67 undeveloped acres planned for medium density residential and a small retail commercial area. The subject property and surrounding area are essentially flat. The Project site is not located within a designated scenic corridor or scenic vista area and would therefore not visually conflict with any major or minor ridgeline; obstruct a foreground or middle ground view of any designated scenic resource; or, degrade or displace a scenic view-shed. The Project will have no substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

I. (b) No Impact: The subject property is without vegetation, accepting naturally occurring annual grasses. There are no neighboring scenic resources including rock outcropping or historic buildings.

The Project is not located along a scenic highway. The Project will have no substantial adverse effect on scenic resources.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

I. (c) Less than Significant Impact: The Project is situated between the ±5.95-acre Oak Manor Industrial Park and a similar sized similarly developed industrial park; vacant land and Storage Master Self Storage is across Dutton Avenue to the west; the SMART rail tracks and single-story, attached multi-family exist to the east. The project site is without vegetation other than naturally occurring annual grasses. The Project will introduce a building form and heights that are distinctly different than the existing, built environment. However, based on existing General Plan and zoning, the Project is the first of several medium density residential projects planned for the area. In order to achieve densities required by the General Plan and zoning district, multiple story building will be required. Given the existing context and projected uses for the area, the fact that the Project is subject to Design Review Board review and must therefore demonstrate superior design, the Project will have a less than significant impact on the existing visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Standard Conditions of Approval:

The site shall be developed consistent with the action of the City of Santa Rosa Design Review Board.

I. (d.) Less than Significant: Exterior lighting shall be accomplished through a combination of building mounted soffit and wall lights, illuminated bollards, and pole-mounted fixtures. Parking lot lighting will be illuminated to provide a foot-candle level between 0.5 and 1.0. All fixtures shall be a cutoff-type to the meet the requirements of CalGreen building standards code. Each light fixture shall be directed downward and away from adjacent properties such that no on-site light fixture directly 19 illuminates an area off-site. The photometric analysis (Source 6) shows minimal light spillover at the property edges. Given the absence of light intrusion, the project’s potential to create a new source of substantial light or glare, adversely affecting day or nighttime views of the area would be less than significant.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11.

Comment: The Project has the potential to impact the existing visual character of the surrounding properties and add a new source of light and glare. However, when uniformly applied development policies and standards set forth in the General Plan and the City of Santa Rosa Design Guidelines are applied to the Project, the potential impact is less than significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 (of which the Project is consistent with) along with potential development in the surrounding region would not be expected to result in cumulative impacts to visual resources. Per Table 2-1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Proposed Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 (GP EIR Table 2-1) K-4, the impact was found to be Less than Significant. The Project has been found to have no Aesthetic impacts.

20 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?

d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?

Discussion:

II. (a-e) No Impact. No farmland designated “Prime”, “Of Statewide Importance”, or “unique” exist within the Santa Rosa city limits as identified in the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of California Resources Agency. The project site is not under a Williamson Act contract, nor would the project create a conflict to agricultural uses since none occur in the area. The Santa Rosa 2035 General Plan does not identify any Agricultural land within the city limits or the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). This project is within the City limits, as is the surrounding lands. There will be no impact to agriculture.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. 21 Sources: 1, 2, 10.

Comment: The Project has been found to have no direct, indirect or cumulative impact on Agriculture.

22 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non- attainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?

Discussion:

The Project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Ambient air quality standards for this area have been established at both the State and federal level. The Bay Area meets all ambient air quality standards with the exception of ground-level ozone, respirable particulate matter (PM10) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).

Ground-level Ozone: High ozone levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). These precursor pollutants react under certain meteorological conditions to form high ozone levels. Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to reduce ozone levels. The highest ozone levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources. Santa Rosa is not within this area. High ozone levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, and increase coughing and chest discomfort.

23 Particulate Matter: Particulate matter is another problematic air pollutant of the Bay Area. Particulate matter is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are the result of both region-wide (or cumulative) emissions and localized emissions. High particulate matter levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, increase mortality (e.g., lung cancer), and result in reduced lung function growth in children.

Toxic air contaminants (TAC) are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (usually because they cause cancer) and include, but are not limited to, the air pollutants listed above. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near the source (e.g., diesel particulate matter near a freeway). Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, state, and Federal level. Diesel exhaust, described as diesel particulate matter or DPM, is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about three-quarters of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the Bay Area average). According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some of the chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under the state's Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. CARB has adopted and implemented a number of regulations for stationary and mobile sources to reduce emissions of DPM. Several of these regulatory programs affect medium and heavy- duty diesel trucks that represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. These regulations include the solid waste collection vehicle (SWCV) rule, in-use public and utility fleets, and the heavy-duty diesel truck and bus regulations. In 2008, CARB approved a new regulation to reduce emissions of DPM and nitrogen oxides from existing on-road, heavy-duty diesel fueled vehicles. The regulation requires affected vehicles to meet specific performance requirements between 2014 and 2023, with all affected diesel vehicles required to have 2010 model-year engines or equivalent by 2023.

These requirements are phased in over the compliance period and depend on the model year of the vehicle. A similar program applies to construction equipment fleets.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the agency tasked with managing air quality in the region. At the State level, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) (a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency) oversees regional air district activities and regulates air quality at the State level. In June 2010, BAAQMD adopted thresholds of significance to assist in the review of projects under CEQA. These thresholds were designed to establish the level at which BAAQMD believed air pollution emissions may cause significant environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and were posted on BAAQMD’s website and included in the Air District’s updated CEQA Guidelines. The significance thresholds identified by BAAQMD represent a conservative approach and are used as a guideline in this analysis. The BAAQMD threshold of significance is 2,000 average daily trips. As determined by the traffic analysis prepared for the Project by W-Trans, consulting traffic engineers, the projected average daily trips is 712 trips. This number is far below the threshold established by the BAAQMD.

Impacts:

III (a-c) Less than Significant Impact. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (Guidelines) set forth criteria for determining a Project’s consistency with the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan (BAAQMD 2011). Per the Guidelines, the BAAQMD 24 considers the Project consistent with the Clean Air Plan if it: 1) can be concluded that a Project supports the primary goals of the Plan (by showing that the Project would not result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts); 2) includes applicable control measures from the Plan, and; 3) does not disrupt or hinder implementation of any Plan control measure. The primary goals of the 2010 Clean Air Plan are to protect air quality, public health, and the climate. The Plan includes 55 “control measures” in five categories: stationary and area source; mobile source; transportation control; land use and local impact; and, energy and climate. These control measures are intended to:
• Reduce emissions and decrease ambient concentrations of harmful pollutants; • Safeguard public health by reducing exposure to air pollutants that pose the greatest health risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most heavily impacted by air pollution; and, • Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to protect the climate. (See Section VII.)

The Bay Area is considered a non-attainment area for ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) under both the federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act. The area is considered non-attainment for respirable particulates or particulate matter with a diameter of less than 10 micrometers (PM10) under the California Clean Air Act, but not the federal act. The area has attained both State and federal ambient air quality standards for carbon monoxide. As part of an effort to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards for ozone and PM10, the BAAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air pollutants along with screening criteria. These thresholds and screening criteria apply for ozone precursor pollutants (ROG and NOx), PM10 and PM2.5 and apply to both construction period and operational period impacts.

In their 2010 update to the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, BAAQMD identified the sizes of various land use for which emissions would be below the BAAQMD significance thresholds for both construction related exhaust and operation emissions. In Section 3: Screening Criteria; Table 3-1, the operational criteria pollutant screening size for apartment /low rise is 451 du. The proposed 107-unit development is well below this threshold.

The Project would not result in a significant and unavoidable air quality impact; would not expose the community to greater health risks stemming from exposure to air pollutants; and, would assist in reducing GHG emissions through its inclusion of green building design measures and the incorporation of all applicable Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan policies.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

III (d) Less than Significant Impact: The Project would not exceed construction related impacts based on the significance tables established by the BAAQMD. The threshold established for low-rise apartment land use is 451 units. Therefore, sensitive receptors including employees in the neighboring business parks and residences to the east would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Standard Conditions of Approval (COA)

Although the Project is below the significance thresholds established by the BAAQMD, the following Standard Conditions of Approval shall be added to the Project conditions to assure compliance with Best Management Practices.

25 Consistent with the Best Management Practices, the following actions shall be incorporated into construction contracts and specifications for the project:

• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day and/or toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked –out onto adjacent public roads shall be swept daily. • 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.
• 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. • 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. • A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and contact information for the designated on-site construction manager available to receive and respond to dust complaints.

This person shall report all complaints to the City of Santa Rosa and take immediate corrective action as soon as practical but not more than 48 hours after the complaint is received. The BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

III. (e) Less than Significant Impact. The project would generate localized emissions of diesel and gasoline exhaust during construction equipment operations and truck activity. These emissions may be noticeable from time to time by adjacent receptors. However, they would be localized and given the size of the project, are not likely to adversely affect people off-site by resulting in confirmed odor complaints. The project is not likely to include any sources of significant odors that would cause complaints from surrounding uses. Any potential use would be required to comply with all city, state and Federal regulation as part of standard permitting procedures.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Sources: 1, 2, 5, 8, 9.

Comment: The Project has been found to be well below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s air quality impact thresholds and has incorporated all mandatory GHG Measures found in the City of Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan. The potential for air quality impacts during construction are adequately addressed through the application of Standard Conditions of Approval. Said Standard conditions of Approval implement air quality and climate change policies found in General Plan 2035.

Upon certification of the General Plan 2035 EIR, the City Council adopted a statement of overriding consideration as regards cumulative air quality impacts. Given the consistency of the Project with the General Plan no further mitigation measure is required. The Project has been found to have no Air Quality impacts.

26 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or
by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?

d. Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,

27 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?

Discussion:

Biological baseline summaries and impact evaluations were prepared for the Project site by Charles A.

Patterson, Plant Ecologist on April 27, 2017 and February 26, 2018. The April 27, 2017 assessment includes the results of five site surveys conducted in 2005, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. The February 26, 2018 letter report specifically addresses the wetland. A Biological Resource Assessment was also prepared by Ted Winfield, PhD. on August 14, 2017. These analyses and conclusions, as well as the biological assessment found in the Negative Declaration prepared for the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, which was adopted by the City Council on March 13, 2006, form the basis for this section.

Biological resources include common plant and animal species, and special-status plants and animals as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Biological resources also include waters of the United States, as regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB), and the CDFW.

Plant Communities and Natural Habitats
According to the Patterson report, vegetation throughout the Site is almost exclusively non-native upland weeds and grasses. The dominant species include (taxonomy according to Munz & Keck, 1968) mustards (Brassica), chickory (Cichorium), thistles (Cirsium, Sonchus, Silybum, Carduus), wild radish (Raphanus), several small nonnative forbs and forage species (Vicia, Geranium, Melilotus, Medicago, Erodium), and numerous introduced grasses (Avena, Lolium multiflorum, Bromus [2], Phalaris aquatica, Hordeum [2], Vulpia, Teniatherum, Cynodon, Festuca arundinacea). There are no trees onsite, nor any other significant woody vegetation; there are a few scattered coyote brush (Baccharis) shrubs.

The soil is regionally typical indigenous (‘Wright’) clay loam, with a dark matrix, but largely devoid of redox or mottling, and with historical additions of various fill materials (rocks, soil, gravel) in places.

Soil across virtually the entire Site has been significantly altered (graded, disked, ditched), as have any/all pre-existing natural drainage features or routes.

The Site was surveyed for possible rare plant occurrences in 2005 (February 22, April 5), 2012 (March 23, April 20, May 4), 2013 (March 27, April 11, May 9), 2014 (April 7, June 25), and 2015 (April 3, 20). Each site visit involved walking essentially the entire Site, noting plants observed, and carefully examining any low places. All plants encountered were identified, at least to the level necessary to determine potential commonness or rarity.

No rare, endangered, or otherwise sensitive plant species were found on the Site during any of the field surveys, and no such species have been historically reported here by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) or the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). In fact, the Site is heavily dominated by an assortment of common non-native annual grasses and weeds, with almost no remaining native vegetation.
28 There are no natural habitats or plant communities that remain on the Site. The entire Site supports a dense carpet of non-native grasses and weeds.

Wetlands
The Site was surveyed for possible wetland conditions during the same field examinations cited above.

Based on these accumulated observations, a map showing minimal wetlands was submitted to and subsequently approved by the Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), resulting in 0.037 acre of a seasonally wet swale habitat, which the Corps claimed as “jurisdictional”. This habitat is not aquatic and is dominated by common nonnative grasses and weeds, with minimal native vegetation, this being a small amount of common semaphore grass and toad rush. The rest of the Site exhibits essentially no hydrophytic vegetation, thoroughly altered and mixed soils, and only small occurrences of fleeting hydrology. As such, the Site is almost completely without wetlands.

According to the February 26, 2018 report, this small wetland feature provides almost no measurable wetland resource value and provides no suitable habitat for any regionally known listed species, plant or wildlife.

The February 26, 2018 report also assessed the potential impact of the development on the wetland.

The report found that the Project, as designed, successfully avoided the wetlands. The report further found that there was no need for protective setback from the wetland because: 1) There are truly no wetland resource attributes to protect. 2) The immediately surrounding grassland (0 to 20 ft. from 0.037 wetland) will capture and filter any fills that might enter the area. 3) The wetland does not rely on area- wide runoff (watershed). The report concludes the setback shown on the site plan is sufficient and given the abscense of any significant biological resources present on site, there is no need for any related mitigation measures or formal wetland or sensitive species permitting.

CTS
The Project Site is designated in the Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO) as “May adversely affect plants, but would not likely adversely affect CTS.”

According to Dr. Ted Winfield Biological Resource Assessment, the nearest known CTS breeding site is located approximately 5,005 feet northwest of the Project Site at the Southwest Community Park (SWP). The other reported CTS breeding sites are either south of Todd Road or west of Stony Point Road.

In an e-mail dated September 8, 2004, from Vincent Griego (FWS) to Mr. Mark Garay (Project Applicant), FWS concluded that “. . . this project will not result in “take” of the threatened [endangered] California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) (CTS). The email goes on to say that the project site lacks potential breeding habitat and is isolated from areas either known or having potential to support CTS. The complete e-mail is appended to Dr. Ted Winfield’s report in Appendix B.

The Project site is isolated from known CTS breeding sites in the region by the construction of residential subdivisions, barrier fencing, curbs and storm drains. Stony Point Road, which is a heavily traveled road also represents a barrier to movement by CTS. In a study by Hels and Buchwald (2001), cited in Trenham and Cook (2008), they estimated that roads with levels of traffic greater than 12,000 vehicles/day would prove to be 100 percent lethal to migrating amphibians. Stony Point Road has an average daily traffic volume of 20,454 vehicles/day.
29 IV. (a) Less Than Significant: The Site was surveyed for possible rare plant occurrences in 2005 (February 22, April 5), 2012 (March23, April 20, May 4), 2013 (March 27, April 11, May 9), 2014 (April 7, June 25), and 2015 (April 3, 20). Each site visit involved walking essentially the entire Site, noting plants observed, and carefully examining any low places. All plants encountered were identified, at least to the level necessary to determine potential commonness or rarity.

The Project Site is designated in the PBO as “May adversely affect plants, but would not likely adversely affect CTS.” In an e-mail dated September 8, 2004, FWS concluded that “. . . this project will not result in “take” of the threatened California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) (CTS).

The project site lacks potential breeding habitat and is isolated from areas either known or having potential to support CTS.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

IV. (b) Less than Significant Impact. There is no riparian habitat and there appears to be no other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. Although the Project site is located within the potential range of the Sonoma County California Tiger Salamander, at the time of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning application for the Project site and an adjoining property to the west (310 Bellevue Avenue) the likelihood of the presence of CTS was reviewed. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project, which was subsequently adopted by the City Council under Resolution Number 26519 determined that based on the urbanized nature of the surroundings, development or improvements on all four sides of the Project, and the no effect letter and email dated September 8, 2004 from the US Department of Fish and Wildlife Service a CTS “take” is not likely to occur.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

IV. (c) Less than Significant Impact. The Site was surveyed for possible wetland conditions during the same field examinations cited in the April 27, 2017 Patterson report. Based on these accumulated observations, a map showing minimal wetlands was submitted to and subsequently approved by the Corps, resulting in 0.037 acre of a seasonally wet swale habitat being claimed as “jurisdictional” by the Corps. This habitat is not aquatic per se and is dominated by common nonnative grasses and weeds, with minimal native vegetation, this being a small amount of common semaphore grass and toad rush.

30 The small wetland area depicted above will be totally avoided by the Project. The February 26, 2018 report prepared by Charles A. Patterson, Plant Ecologist, concludes the setback shown on the site plan is sufficient and given the abscense of any significant biological resources present on site, there is no need for any related mitigation measures or formal wetland or sensitive species permitting. Hence, the impact is considered Less than Significant.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

IV. (d) Less than Significant Impact. As depicted in the aerial photo below, the site and surrounding properties are without significant vegetative cover that would provide a natural habitat for native resident or migratory wildlife species. Likewise, the site is not within an established wildlife corridor.

31 There may be minimum habitat value in the existing grasses that presently cover the site for ground- nesting bird species. Although not considered significant, the application of a standard condition of approval (COA) requiring pre-construction surveys for properties with on-site or adjoining trees/vegetation will address any potential impact on ground-nesting birds. Development of the site may enhance the habitat value through the addition of street trees and on-site landscaping. The Project is considered to have a Less than Significant Impact on the movement of native or migratory wildlife species.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

IV(e-f) No Impact. The Project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance or adopted conservation plans. The only applicable local ordinance is the Santa Rosa Tree Ordinance and there are no trees onsite.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Standard Conditions of Approval (COA)

Pre-construction surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbing activities if the activities occur during the nesting season (February 1 to August 15).

Preconstruction surveys will be repeated at 30-day intervals until construction has started. Active nests

32 will be identified, located, and described and protective measures will be implemented. Protective measures will include establishment of clearly delineated (i.e., Visi-barrier, orange construction fencing) exclusion zones around each nest site. The active nest sites within exclusion zones will be monitored on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify any signs of disturbance or nest abandonment. The barriers marking exclusion zones will remain in place until the young have left the nest and are foraging independently or if the nest is no longer active.

Sources: 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17.

Comments. Expansion of urban land uses envisioned under the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 would remove or alter wetlands, marshes, or vernal pools. The EIR for the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 found this potential impact to be Less than Significant with adherence to applicable General Plan policies. The Project will implement General Plan policy OSC-D-1 which permits protection of wetlands through avoidance.

33 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
as defined in §15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries? [Public Resources Code,
Ch. 1.75, §5097.98, and Health and
Safety Code §7050.5(b)]

e. Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource as defined in
Public Resources Code 21074?

A Historical Resources Study by Origer & Associated dated March 6, 2017, designed to satisfy environmental issues specified in CEQA, was prepared for the Project site. This report serves as the basis of the following analysis and conclusions.

Discussion:

The Project site, located in the City of Santa Rosa, is in an area planned for multi-family residential development. The site is vacant, approximately 5.95 acres in size, of minimal slope and located approximately 3 miles southwest of downtown Santa Rosa, as shown on the Santa Rosa, California

7.5’ USGS topographic maps. There are no known unique geological or paleontological features on the Project site that would indicate the presence of cultural resources. The Project site was subject of a full Cultural Resources Study in March of 2017 and no resources were identified.

Impacts:
34 V. (a, b, c, d, e) Less than Significant Impact. The Origer Report stated that lands within the vicinity of the Project had been studied previously (Bowen 2015). Historical resources were identified during the Bowen study. However, the identified resources do not have the potential to extend into the Project area. There were no reported ethnographic sites within a quarter mile of the study area. The field survey completed for the Project site discovered two isolated artifacts, a cobalt blue glass fragment and a blue flow ceramic plate shard. The report determined that isolated artifacts do not constitute historical resources; therefore, no historic resources were found. A request for comment was sent to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission as well the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, Kashia Band of Pomo Indians of Stewarts Point and the Lytton Rancheria of California. No response was received.

Recommended Mitigation Measures. None required.

There is a possibility that buried archaeological deposits could be present, and accidental discovery could occur. To address this potential as well as the possibility of uncovering human remains the application of uniformly applied development policies in the form of Standard Conditions of Approval will adequately address this possibility.

Standard Conditions of Approval (COA)/ Uniformly Applied Development Policies:

CUL-1 Archaeological Resources

If archaeological remains are uncovered, work at the place of discovery should be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the finds. Prehistoric archaeological site indicators include: obsidian and chert flakes and chipped stone tools; grinding and mashing implements (e.g., slabs and handstones, and mortars and pestles); bedrock outcrops and boulders with mortar cups; and locally darkened midden soils. Midden soils may contain a combination of any of the previously listed items with the possible addition of bone and shell remains, and fire affected stones. Historic period site indicators generally include: fragments of glass, ceramic, and metal objects; milled and split lumber; and structure and feature remains such as building foundations and discrete trash deposits (e.g., wells, privy pits, dumps).

CUL-2 Human Remains

If human remains are encountered, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the find and with an adequate buffer zone will be halted and, in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, the County Coroner will be notified and permitted to assess the remains. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted within a reasonable timeframe. Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the “most likely descendant.” The most likely descendant shall then make recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98.

Sources: 1, 2, 14.

Comment: The Project has the potential to impact archaeological and cultural resources. However, when uniformly applied development policies and standards set forth in the General Plan and 35 Standard Conditions of Approval are applied to the Project, the potential impact is less than significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies, archaeological, paleontological and cultural resources would be further protected. The General Plan EIR further found that development within the city of Santa Rosa consistent with its General Plan policies, along with potential development in the surrounding region would not be expected to result in cumulative impacts to archaeological or cultural resources. (GP EIR Table 2-1: J-1 through J-4) The potential impacts were found to be Less than Significant. The Project has been found to have no Cultural Resources impacts.

36 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on, or off, site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?

e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?

37 Discussion: A Soils Investigation was prepared for the subject property by Young Engineering Services, Geotechnical Consultants. Said report is dated September 21, 2001. The soils investigation included field exploration, excavating 4 test pits, obtaining core samples and laboratory testing.

Recommendations for site development are included in the report. Information contained in this report as well as the General Plan 2035 EIR and the UC Davis Soils map form the basis of this analysis.

VI. (a. i) Less Than Significant Impact. Published geologic maps show no active faults in the vicinity of the site. The nearest faults considered seismically active include the Healdsburg-Rogers Creek Fault and the San Andreas Fault. The project site is located approximately 2 miles to the northeast of the Healdsburg-Rogers Creek Fault and 18 miles to the southwest of the San Andreas Fault. The site is not within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. As a result, the risk of fault rupture at the site is considered significantly low.

VI. (a. ii, iii, c, d) Less than Significant. The City of Santa Rosa is subject to geological hazards related primarily to seismic events (earthshaking) due to presence of active faults. The project site is located outside of the approximate limits of the area subject to strong seismic ground shaking as depicted in the General Plan 2035 (Figure 12-3). The UC Davis Interactive SoilWeb indicates the soil- type to be Wright Loam. The site exploration performed by Young Engineering Services found the upper soil unit to be weak and porous sandy clay which varied in depth between 1 to 1.5 feet. These soils are considered to have a low to high expansion potential. The site is underlain by a stiff to very stiff sandy clay, which is considered to have a low to medium expansion potential.

Application of Uniform Building Code, City standards and Title 24/California Code of Regulations in effect at the time of a building permit application as well as all measures outlined in the preliminary geologic investigation and soils report prepared prior to building permit issuance will address potential impacts related to possible seismic activity.

The following Standard conditions of Approval shall be applied to the Project at the time of Building permit issuance:

Standard Conditions of Approval:
• All structures shall be designed in accordance with California Building Code (CBC) and any local amendments thereto in place at the time of building permit submittal.

• All recommendation of the preliminary geologic investigation prepared for the project prior to the issuance of building and grading permits shall be incorporated into the project design.

• The Project Civil Engineer shall design the site drainage to collect surface water into storm drain systems and discharge water at appropriate locations. Erosion control measures during and after construction shall conform to the most recent version of Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual prepared by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

VI. (a. iv, b) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is level. Land sliding is not present or anticipated to be so. Likewise, substantial soil erosion or loss of top soil is not anticipated. The project will be subject to erosion control measures during and after construction as indicated in the Standard Conditions of Approval (COA), cited above.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

38 VI. (e) No Impact. The project would connect to the existing wastewater system and would not need septic tanks or an alternative wastewater disposal system.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 11, 15, 16, 17.

Comment: When uniformly applied development policies and standards set forth in the General Plan and Standard Conditions of Approval are applied to the Project, the potential impact on Geology, Soils, and Seismicity is less than significant. The General Plan EIR found that development within the city of Santa Rosa consistent with its General Plan policies, along with potential development in the surrounding region would not be expected to result in significant impacts or cumulatively significant impacts to geologic and seismic hazards. (GP EIR Table 2-1: M-1 through M-3) The potential impacts were found to be Less than Significant. The Project has been found to have no impacts to Geology and Soils.

39 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impa
ct

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
a. Generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?

b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy
or regulation of an agency adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?

Discussion:

VII. (a-b). Less than Significant Impact: Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate, such as average temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns over a period of time.

Climate change may result from natural processes, and human activities that change the composition of the atmosphere and alter the surface and features of the land. Significant changes in global climate patterns have recently been associated with global warming, an average increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface, attributed to accumulation of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, which in turn heats the surface of the Earth. Some GHGs occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes, while others are created and emitted solely through human activities. The emission of GHJGs through the combustion of fossil fuels (i.e. fuels containing carbon) in conjunction with other human activities, appears to be closely associated with global warming. State law define GHG to include the following carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (n2)), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (Health and Safety Code, section 38505(g).) The most common GHG that results from human activity is carbon dioxide, followed by methane and nitrous oxide.

Assembly Bill 32 (AB32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, recognizes that California is the source of substantial amounts of GHG emissions. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health- related problems. In order to avert these consequences, AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2035 (a reduction of approximately 25 percent from forecast emission levels) with further reductions to follow.

40 On December 4, 2001, the Santa Rosa City Council adopted a resolution to become a member of Cities for Climate Protection (CCP), a project of the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives.

On August 2, 2005 the City adopted Resolution 26341 which committed the City of Santa Rosa (City) to reduce the City's municipal (i.e., city government) greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent below 2000 levels by 2010 and committed to help facilitate the community-wide greenhouse gas reduction target of 25% from 1990 levels by 2015 (City of Santa Rosa 2005). In October 2008, the nine Sonoma County cities and the County with the help of the Climate Protection Campaign (CPC) incorporated the greenhouse gas reduction goals into the Sonoma County Community Climate Action Plan (CAP).

In June 2012, the City approved the Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan (SRCAP) The SRCAP identifies a need to reduce emissions by a total of 558,090 tons (or 25%) below business-as-usual levels projected for 2020 to meet the established greenhouse gas reduction goals. The SRCAP includes recommendations for reducing emissions in the building, transportation, agriculture, forestry, and solid waste sectors and includes recommendations to reduce the City’s reliance on the electrical grid by implementing renewable energy projects. The SRCAP measures, policies and projects to reduce community wide GHGs are aligned with the goals and policies of the Santa Rosa General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element.

To ensure that new development complies with the City’s GHG reduction program, the SRCAP contains a “New Development Checklist”. The Checklist contains policies allowing new development to incorporate measures for SRCAP compliance and to reduce potential GHG impacts to less than significant levels. The Checklist denotes 15 mandatory measures. If a project cannot meet one or more the mandatory measures, substitution of other measures described in the Checklist is permitted.

The proposed development at 3150 Dutton Avenue incorporates all mandatory measures contained the SRCAP that are applicable to residential projects. A total of 22 measures will be complied with. These include the following:

Policy 1.3.1: Real time Energy Monitors: The Project will include energy monitors to track energy use.

Policy 1.4.2: Comply with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Santa Rosa Code Section 17-

24.020: No trees will be removed.

Policy 1.5: Install new sidewalks and paving with high solar reflectivity materials: All proposed new sidewalks, driveways and parking areas will be paved with materials that contain either color or other enhancements to provide enhanced reflectivity. 41 Policy 2.1.3: Pre-wire and pre-plumb for solar thermal or PV systems: The project may include the installation of solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of the community building.

Policy 3.2.2: Improve non-vehicular network to promote walking, biking: The Project is designed to promote walking and biking through the provision of bicycle lockers, sidewalks and bicycle lanes as required along Dutton Avenue. The project is bordered by the SMART rail, which includes a bicycle-pedestrian path along its western edge. It is a project objective to promote use of area bicycle and pedestrian paths.

Policy 3.3.1: Provide affordable housing near transit. The project is a medium density residential rental project. The Project will be responsible for the payment of all required affordable housing impact fees.

Policy 3.6.1: Install calming features to improve pedestrian/bike experience: The Project will be responsible for improvements along its Dutton Avenue frontage.

Policy 4.1.1: Implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: Any required improvements along Dutton Avenue will be done in accordance with city standards.

Policy 4.1.2: Install bicycle parking consistent with regulations: 102 bicycle lockers will be provided. Bicycle parking shall be provided per the city’s Zoning code.

Policy 5.1.2: Install electric vehicle charging equipment: Several electrical vehicles charging stations will be provided in the parking area.

Policy 6.1.3: Increase diversion of construction waste: The contractor will divert construction waste to the extent practicable and prepare a Construction Waste Management Plan for recycling and disposal of construction wastes.

Policy 7.1.1: Reduce potable water for landscaping: The Project landscaping will utilize low water use plants. Landscape irrigation will utilize drip systems using a smart controller. The Project will be compliant with the City of Santa Rosa’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO).

Policy 7.1.3: Use water meters which tract real-time water use. Such meters will be used.

Policy 7.3.2: Meet on-site meter separation requirements in locations with current or future recycle water capabilities: This policy will be adhered to.

Policy 8.1.3: Establish community gardens and urban farms: Community gardens have been incorporated into the Project’s design.
42 Policy 9.1.2: Provide outdoor outlets for charging lawn equipment: Policy noted.

Policy 9.1.3: Install low water use landscapes: Low water use landscapes will be used. The Project will be compliant with the City of Santa Rosa’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

The proposed project is consistent with the applicable local plans, policies and regulations (see Section X. Land Use, Response b) and would not conflict with the provisions of AB 32, the provisions of the SRCAP, the applicable air quality plan, or any other State or regional plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Project impact on GHG is found to be less than significant.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 5, 9, 11.

Comment: The Project has incorporated the mandatory GHG Measures found in the City of Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan. Said measures are reflected in the policies of the General Plan. Therefore, the Project has been found to have a less than significant impact on GHG emissions.

43 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?

b. Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?

d. Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?

e. For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?

f. For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?

g. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
44 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?

Discussion:

VIII. (a through f and h) No Impact. The proposed project would be required to comply with relevant Fire and Building Codes, which will reduce the risk of upset or release from the use or transport of hazardous materials. According to the State of California EnviroStor Database of Hazardous Material Cleanup Sites, the site is not in or near any Federal or State Superfund Sites. The proposed use is a multi-family residential use and does not include hazardous materials other than the use of various materials by the residents that are readily available to the consumer for household uses. The project will not create a significant risk of upset or exposure hazard to human health and safety.

The project would not result in hazardous emissions or handle acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school. Water for the site will be provided by the City of Santa Rosa. Accordingly, the project is not anticipated to create a significant risk of upset or hazard to human health and safety.

The project site is located approximately 10.9 miles from the Charles M. Schultz Sonoma County Airport, and is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan planning area. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip.

The proposed site is located in an urbanized industrial/residential area. The site is not located within an urban wildland fire zone. The site is served by a fully developed public roadway system.

VIII. (g). Less than Significant Impact. The City of Santa Rosa is under the County of Sonoma’s jurisdiction for the Department of Emergency Services. The Division of Emergency Management in the Department of Emergency Services is the lead agency for the Sonoma Operational Area. The Sonoma Operational Area consists of nine incorporated cities (Cloverdale, Cotati, Healdsburg, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, and the Town of Windsor), Sonoma State University, the Sonoma County Junior College District, and other special districts within the county's geographical boundary. Construction at the project site would not interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. However, there may be brief and intermittent disruptions to traffic during construction at the site. Flaggers will monitor all road disruptions and will clear the road for emergency vehicles.

This potential impact can be addressed through the application of Standard Conditions of Approval regarding Emergency Response and Traffic Control

45 Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigations required.

Standard Conditions of Approval

Emergency Response/Traffic Control

The applicant shall adopt standard traffic control procedures to minimize traffic congestion and traffic hazards. As required, construction flagging and signage, use of plates, and other safety measures shall be in conformance with Caltrans 2006 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devises. Other measures shall include:
• If temporary lane or street closures are required, the applicant shall contact emergency response providers (i.e., hospitals, police, fire, and ambulance) to determine if the street s impacted are considered primary routes.
• Where construction necessitates lane or street closures along emergency response routes, the applicant shall recommend and obtain approval of alternate routes or other means from the affected service providers, at a minimum of one week prior to construction. • During construction, the applicant shall notify the service providers on a weekly basis of the timing, location, and duration of construction.
• The applicant shall maintain pedestrian and vehicular access to publ ic facilities, businesses, and residences along the street during commute hours and shall minimize the closure of pedestrian and vehicular access at other times. Peak commute hours are between 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM.

Sources: 1, 2, 10, 11.

Comment: The Project has the potential to impact emergency response times. However, when uniformly applied development policies and standards set forth in the General Plan and Standard Conditions of Approval are applied to the Project, the potential impact is less than significant.

Therefore, the Project has been found to have a less than significant impact on emergency response times.

46 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume
or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to
a level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off- site?

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding
on- or off- site?

e. Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
47 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map?

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard
area structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding
as a result of the failure of a levee or
dam?

j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?

Discussion:

Water Supply: To determine the water supply needs for the City of Santa Rosa’s future development, the
Utilities Department has calculated water demand and water supply projections. These projections are included in the City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan and the Water Supply Assessment for the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035. To meet the current water supply needs, the City has an agreement for water supply with the Sonoma County Water Agency to receive up to 29,100 acre-feet per year of water.

In addition, the City has two groundwater wells that can produce up to 2,300 acre-feet per year and the City is the owner and operator of the Sub-Regional System, which produces recycled water for irrigation.

To meet the needs of the City’s General Plan growth projections, additional water sources beyond what the City has currently developed could be needed. To augment currently developed supply, the City will use water conservation, recycled water, additional groundwater (wells), and possibly additional supply from the Sonoma County Water Agency. At this time, there is adequate reliable water supply during most hydrologic conditions for both current users and future users as dictated by the City’s growth management regulations.

The City has had a long-standing commitment to water conservation, resulting in savings of over 3,900 acre-feet per year. In 1976-77, the City began its water conservation program and over the years has implemented many innovative water conservation incentives, such as the Go Low Flow program (replaced over 47,000 high flow toilets, showerheads and faucet aerators with ultra-low flow versions), washing machine rebate programs, landscape irrigation rebate programs, and other residential and 48 commercial programs. Development fees fund the City’s Water Conservation Program. In addition, new
development is required to install ultra-low flush toilets and low flow showerheads and faucet aerators, as well as water efficient landscapes. The Project will also be required to be in compliance with the Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance adopted by the City in October, 2015.

The Project will install plumbing fixtures and fittings that will include other water conserving measures in accordance with CALGreen Tier 1 requirements, as described in the Project Description.

Water Quality: Stormwater, or runoff generated from rain, that is not absorbed into the ground accumulates debris, chemicals and other polluting substances harmful to water quality. Polluted stormwater entering creeks is a concern because of its threat to public health and the plant and animal life that inhabit waterways. Additionally, rain runoff from developments may increase flow rates and durations that cause hydromodification in creeks, contributing to loss of habitat and decreased aquatic biological diversity.

IX. (a-f) Less than Significant Impact.
(a.) 3150 Dutton Avenue Development Project is within the permit boundary of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 Storm Water Permit, which regulates discharges into the watershed with the intent of reducing storm water pollution and protecting water quality. Pursuant to the active NPDES permit, the City of Santa Rosa and the County of Sonoma have adopted the Storm Water Low Impact Development (LID) Technical Design Manual. A Preliminary Storm Water Mitigation Plan (PSWMP) was developed for 3150 Dutton Ave. The PSWMP is in compliance with the City’s LID Manual. Once approved, implementation of the SWMP will assure compliance with NPDES regulations.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

(b.) The project will use municipal water from the City of Santa Rosa. On site wells will not be utilized for water service or landscaping. The City of Santa Rosa municipal water system is sufficient to supply water to the project. Furthermore, through the implementation of Best Management Practices outlined in the project’s PSWMP, perforations along the bottom of the stormdrain pipe will be used to allow for infiltration into the native soil.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

IX. (c, d) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Project will alter on-site drainage by increasing the area of impervious surfaces. However, this increase in runoff will be offset by incorporating BMP’s designed in accordance with the City of Santa Rosa and County of Sonoma Low Impact Development (LID) Technical Design Manual to achieve volume capture and treatment requirements which will control and minimize the potential for erosion, siltation, and flooding.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Standard Conditions of Approval (COA)

49 The developer’s engineer shall comply with all requirements of the latest edition of the City Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan Guidelines. Final plans shall include a Final Storm Water Mitigation Plan.

STANDARD MEASURES
• Developer's engineer shall comply with all requirements of the City Standard Storm Water Mitigation Plan Guidelines using Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs).
• Final Plans shall address the storm water quality and quantity along with a maintenance agreement or comparable document to assure continuous maintenance of the source and treatment. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board may approve alternative mitigation.
• Submit landscape and irrigation plans in conformance with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance adopted by the Santa Rosa City Council, Resolution No. 27518, on November 17, 2009. Plans shall be submitted with the Building Permit application. Submit the following with the above-mentioned plans: Maximum Applied Water Allowance (Appendix A) and Hydrozone Table (Appendix B).
• A Final Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) using Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMP) is to be included with the Building Permit application.
• Alternative approaches to mitigating storm water impacts may be approved by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

IX. (h-j) No Impact: The project site is not located within a flood zone (Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 Figure 12-4). As such, the proposed project is not anticipated to expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, nor is the site expected to be impacted by inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 5, 11, 15, 16, 17.

Comment: The Project has the potential to impact water quality. However, when uniformly applied development policies and standards set forth in the General Plan; Standard Conditions of Approval, and measures found in the SUSMP are applied to the Project, the potential impact is less than significant.

The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies, hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant. (GP EIR Table 2-1: H-1 through H-6).

50 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community?
b. Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?

c. Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
Discussion:

The Project site has been anticipated for development since March 14, 2006 when the City Council approved and adopted a General Plan Amendment from the General Industry to the Medium Density Residential land use designation and a Rezoning from the IG (General Industry) to the Multi-Family Residential/18 units per acre (R-3-18) district (Resolution No. 26519). The site was included in the current City of Santa Rosa 2035 General Plan certified in 2009 as a Medium Density Residential site.

The proposed land use for the Project are consistent with the policies, objectives, and land uses in the current General Plan.

The Project proposes a gated residential community of 107 apartments. The apartments will include 33 one-bedroom, 64 two-bedroom, and 10 three-bedroom units within 5 buildings. The building complex consists of 1 two-story, 3 three-story, and 1 mixed three and four-story building. Amenities include a leasing office/ internet cafe, club house, kitchen, wine storage, and fitness center. Public gathering areas, such as a swimming pool, bocce ball area and community gardens are also included. Heights range from 22 ft. for the two-story building to 42 ft. for the four-story portion of the three/four-story building. Covered and uncovered parking is provided as well as private bicycle storage lockers. The Project site adjoins the SMART rail tracks to the east. An intention of the Project is to provide a well- design residential rental community whose tenant will become riders of the SMART rail and utilize the pedestrian/bicycle pathway along the SMART rail corridor.

The Project is a CalGreen project and will set a design standard for the ±10 acres of undeveloped medium density residential to the west/northwest.

51 X. (a-c) Less than Significant Impact. The site is situated in a mixed-use area consisting of industrial development to the north and south; the SMART rail tracks and single-story, attached, low to medium density residential are to the east; and, planned for medium residential development to the north/northwest. Although the Project will introduce residential development along this portion of Dutton Avenue, the Project is a portion of a planned for multi-family residential area. The adjacent industrial uses are non-noxious in nature and do not raise issues regarding compatibility. Assessing the project in context, the project will not physically divide an established community and, therefore, will have no impact.

The Project is consistent with the existing Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation which was applied to the property by action of the City Council on March 14, 2006 and subsequently included in the scope of review of the City of Santa Rosa 2035 General Plan/Final EIR, 2009. The Project is consistent with the General Plan, the applicable zoning regulations and design guidelines.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11.

Comment: The Project’s Land Use impacts are Less than Significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies all Land Use Impacts including potential cumulative impact would be Less than Significant (GP EIR Table 2-1: A-1 through A-3). The Project is consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan. The Project has been found to have no Land Use impacts.

52 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents
of the state?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?

Discussion:

XI. (a-b) No Impact. The project site does not contain any locally or regionally significant minera l resources. The proposed development of the project site will not create an adverse impact upon locally or regionally significant mineral resources since no such resources have been identified on the project site.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 10, 15, 16.

Comment: The Project has no potential to impact on mineral resources.

53 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XII. NOISE
Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?

b. Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without
the project?

d. A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?

e. For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?

f. For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise
levels?

Discussion: A noise analysis was conducted for the Project by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., acoustical and air quality engineers. This report as well as the policies established in the Noise and Safety Element of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 and accompanying EIR form the basis of this analysis. 54 The City of Santa Rosa’s General Plan establishes noise and land use compatibility standards that are used to evaluate a project’s compatibility with the noise environment. Multifamily residential land uses are considered “normally acceptable” in noise environments of 65 dBA DNL or less.

The site is bordered by commercial land uses to the north, south, and southwest, opposite Dutton Avenue. The SMART railroad tracks border the site to the east, with residential land uses on the opposite side of the tracks.

A noise monitoring survey was performed to quantify and characterize ambient noise levels at the project site between Thursday, March 2, 2017 and Friday, March 3, 2017. The noise environment at the site results primarily from vehicular traffic along Dutton Avenue and SMART trains along the railroad tracks. SMART train operations are currently in the testing phase, and without current operational quiet zones, the trains are blowing their horns.

XII.(a,b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As indicated, a noise monitoring survey was conducted. The result of said survey is summarized in Table 4 of the report.

The survey found that in all cases, the noise, primarily from traffic along Dutton Avenue would remain within the “normally acceptable” range of 65 dBA, as established by General Plan policy. Future exterior noise environments were also analyzed. The report found the future unmitigated traffic noise would not exceed the 65dBA noise level established by the General.

SMART train and freight train noise would continue to be the predominant noise source along the eastern boundary of the project site. The SMART Supplemental EIR, dated March 2008, assumes the installation of Quiet Zones in Santa Rosa, which would reduce noise impacts resulting from future passenger and freight trains along the corridor. Since the project site is located between the at-grade railroad crossings at Bellevue Avenue and W. Robles Avenue, it is assumed that trains passing by the site would be traveling no faster than 25 mph. Future noise levels along the Northwestern Pacific Rail corridor, as described in the SMART SEIR Revised Cumulative Impacts Section dated March 2008, are estimated to reach 60dBA DNL at a distance of 50 feet, assuming a train speed of 25 mph in the Santa Rosa area. Therefore, the future unmitigated traffic noise exposure at the eastern façade of the proposed project site is calculated to be up to 52dBA DNL, which would be below the City’s 65dBA DNL threshold for exterior noise environments at multi-family residential land uses.

Given the existing and future noise environment, the interior noise environment may exceed the General Plan policy of 45dBA for night-time noise with windows partially open. The project description includes and the project’s construction plans will include all construction methods recommended in the noise analysis. These construction methods exceed standard construction requirements and will appear on the building plans. With the incorporation of construction methods to reduce potential noise impacts, the Project achieves consistency with General Plan policy regarding Noise.

Recommended Mitigation:

Building Construction Plans shall incorporate all recommendations found in the noise analysis:

• Attaining the necessary noise reduction from exterior-to-interior spaces is readily achievable with proper wall construction techniques, the selections of proper windows and doors, and the incorporation of forced-air mechanical ventilation systems. Said techniques are as follows:
55 • The units in Building D along the northern, southern, and eastern façades, shall use windows and sliding glass doors with STC ratings of STC 35 to 38. Along the western façade of Building D, windows and sliding glass doors with STC ratings of STC 28 to 31 would be required.
• The units in Buildings A and B along the northern, southern, and western façades, shall use windows and sliding glass doors with STC ratings of STC 26 to 28. The remaining interior would need windows and sliding glass doors with STC ratings of STC 26 to 31 to achieve interior noise standards. All of the units in the proposed buildings should also be provided some form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, satisfactory to the local building official, to adequately ventilate the interior space of the units when windows are closed to control noise.

XII. (c.) No Impact. The project will not add a substantial permanent increase to the ambient noise level.

Recommended Mitigation Measures. None required.

XII. (d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Although the surrounding land uses lack sensitive receptors, the ambient noise environment could increase at the time of construction.

Implementation of the following Mitigation Measures at the time of building construction will result in a Less than Significant Impact.

Recommended Mitigation Measures.

Implementation of the following Mitigation Measures would reduce construction noise levels emanating from the site to less than significant, thereby minimizing disruption and annoyance.

1. Muffle and maintain all equipment used on site. All internal combustion engine- driven equipment shall be fitted with mufflers, which are in good condition. Good mufflers shall result in non-impact tools generating a maximum noise level of 80 dB when measured at a distance of 50 feet.

2. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.

3. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area.

4. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.

5. Prohibit construction workers’ radios which are audible on adjoining properties.

6. Restrict noise-generating activities at the construction site or in areas adjacent to the construction site to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturdays, with no construction is permitted on Sundays and holidays.

7. Do not allow machinery to be cleaned or serviced past 7:00 p.m. or prior to 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday

8. Limit the allowable hours for the delivery of materials or equipment to the site and truck traffic coming to and from the site for any purpose to Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.

9. Allowable construction hours shall be posted clearly on a sign at the construction site.

10. The construction contractor shall designate a “noise disturbance coordinator” who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. 56 A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. The Disturbance Coordinator shall:

1. Receive and act on complaints about construction disturbances during site clearing, excavation, infrastructure installation, road building, residential construction, and site other construction activities.

2. Determine the cause(s) and implement remedial measures as necessary to alleviate significant problems.

3. Clearly post his/her name and phone number(s) on a sign at the construction site.

4. Notify area residents of construction activities, schedules, and potential impacts.

XII. (e and f) No Impact. The project site is located ±11 miles from the Charles M. Schultz/Sonoma County Airport, and is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan planning area. The project site is not located near a public or private airport, and therefore would not be subject to air-traffic related noise impacts.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 18.

Comment: The Project’s Noise impacts are Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies all Noise Impacts including potential cumulative impact would be Less than Significant (GP EIR Table 2-1: E-1 through E-5). The Project is consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan.

57 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses)
or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

Discussion:

XII. (a). Less than Significant Impact. A project would be considered growth-inducing if it were to provide new housing, new employment, or expand existing infrastructure not planned for by the City’s General Plan. The Project site was the subject of a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning to specifically allow Medium Density Residential development (8 – 18 units/acre). The Project would provide 107 new rental units and upgrade existing infrastructure to the extent required by city regulations. Given the consistency of the Project with the city’s long range planning documents, the Project is not considered growth inducing.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

This designation permits a range of housing types, including single family attached and multifamily developments, and is intended for specific areas where higher density is appropriate. The site is currently vacant. Therefore, development will not displace existing housing or persons residing in said housing nor displace substantial numbers of people during the construction phase.

XII. (b-c). No Impact. The site is a residentially designated, vacant site. The Project will neither displace housing units nor substantial numbers of people. The Project will have no impact.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 11.

58 Comment: A project would be considered growth-inducing if it were to provide new housing, new employment, or expand existing infrastructure not planned for by the City’s General Plan. The density of the Project is consistent with and has been anticipated by the General Plan. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 along with potential development in the surrounding region would not be expected to result in cumulative impacts to Population, Housing and Employment. Per Table 2-1: B-1 – B-3. The Project has been found to have no Population and Housing impacts.

59 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:

a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks?
e. Other public facilities?
Discussion:

XIV. (a-e) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the City of Santa Rosa and would receive all necessary public services. Fire protection services will be provided by the City of Santa Rosa. Police protection services will be provided by the City’s Police Department. The project is consistent with the build-out anticipated by the City’s General Plan 2035. The Project is located in the Bellevue School District. A number of development impact fees are required to be paid for development in the city of Santa Rosa. The purpose of the impact fees is to assist in offsetting the impact of development on city infrastructure and services. Capital Facilities, Water, Wastewater, Park and Recreation, Affordable Housing and School impact fees will be required to be paid at the time of building permit issuance. Fees peculiar to the boundaries of Southwest Area Plan may be required as part of Project development.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

Standard Condition of Approval:
• Evidence showing payment of park development fees will be provided prior to City issuance of any building permits.

60 Sources: 1, 2, 3, 11.

Comment: The Project’s Public Services impacts are Less than Significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies all Public Services Impacts including potential cumulative impact would be Less than Significant (GP EIR Table 2-1: I-1 through I-7). The Project is consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan. Standard Conditions of Approval will assure the payment of all applicable public services impact fees. The Project has been found to have no Public Service impacts.

61 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XV. RECREATION
Would the project:
a. Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?

b. Include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have
an adverse physical effect on the
environment?

Discussion/Impacts:

XV. (a, b). Less than Significant Impact: The Project is a 107-unit residential project and would contribute to the need for overall park and recreational demand. The Project has provided recreational space and amenities as part of the Project and will be required to pay Park. Development of the Project site has been anticipated since 2008 and infrastructure, including parks to serve this and other development in the southwestern quadrant of the City, was anticipated and analyzed in the General Plan 2035. The Project’s payment of the City’s park in-lieu fees would offset the Project’s demand for increased recreational facilities.

Standard Condition of Approval:
• Evidence showing payment of any applicable park development fees will be provided prior to City issuance of any building permits.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 11.

Comment: The Project’s Recreation impacts are Less than Significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies all Parks and Recreation Impacts including potential cumulative impact would be Less than Significant (GP EIR Table 2-1: P-1 through P-3). The Project is consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan. Standard Conditions of Approval will assure the payment of all applicable recreational services impact fees. The Project has been found to have no Recreation impacts.

62 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:
a. Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system,
taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and
non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and mass transit?

b. Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?

c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?

d. Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or
otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?

63 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

Discussion:

XVI. (a-b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A Traffic Impact Study for the Project was prepared by W-Trans, consulting traffic engineers. The report is dated July 20, 2018.

This report serves as the basis for this analysis. Operating conditions were evaluated during the a.m. (7:00 to 9:00) and p.m. (4:00 to 6:00) peak periods. This was done in order to capture the highest potential impacts for the proposed Project as well as the highest volumes on the local transportation network. The report studied the intersections of Bellevue Avenue/Dutton Avenue and Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotto Avenue. Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various type of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. By policy the city of Santa Rosa General Plan strives to maintain a LOS D along major roadways.

Existing Conditions – Peak Hour
Study Intersection AM Peak PM Peak
Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS
Bellevue Avenue/Dutton Avenue 15.2 C 22.0 C
Todd Rd/Standish - Ghilotti Ave. 13.2 B 49.4 E
Northbound- Ghilotti - Approach 12.6 B 12.4 B
Southbound – Standish Approach 69.1 F +120 F

LOS: Future Conditions and Future Plus Project Conditions – Peak Hour Study Intersection Future Conditions Future plus Project Approach AM - LOS PM - LOS AM - LOS PM - LOS
Bellevue Ave/Dutton Ave C D C D
Todd Rd/Standish-Ghilotti Ave C D C D

As shown in the above table, all intersections will operate at the same LOS with or without the Project.

LOS assumes installation of improvements.

The Traffic Analysis concluded the following:

• The project is expected to generate an average of 712 new trips per day including 55 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 66 trips during the p.m. peak hour.

64 • Under Existing Conditions, the study intersections operate acceptably at LOC C or better overall during the a.m. peak hour; however, Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue operates unacceptably at LOS E overall during the p.m. peak hour.

• The peak hour signal warrant is met based on p.m. peak hour volumes at the intersection of Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue. The peak hour signal warrant is not met at the intersection of Bellevue Avenue/Dutton Avenue under Existing oe Existing plus Project Conditions.

• Upon the addition of project-generated traffic to Existing Conditions, the study intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably during the a.m. peak hour but Todd Road/ Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue is expected to deteriorate to LOS F during the p.m. peak.

The increase in delay on the southbound approach at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue during the a.m. peak period is greater than five seconds and is considered a significant impact under County Standards.

• Under anticipated Future volumes, and assuming completion of suggested improvements, the study intersections are expected to operate acceptably during both peak periods.

• It is recommended that the County consider installing a traffic signal at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue and restriping the Standish Avenue approach to provide a southbound left-turn lane in order to achieve acceptable operation under existing and future conditions, without or with the project.

• The project applicant should install all-way stop controls, restripe the southbound Standish Avenue approach to include a left-turn lane and restripe the westbound Todd Road approach to include a right turn lane at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue to achieve acceptable operations in the short term.

• A proportional share contribution of 2.2 percent of the costs funded by private development should be paid towards the future improvements at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue to install a traffic signal unless such costs are included in a traffic impact fee.

• A proportional share contribution of 4.5 percent of the costs funded by private development should be paid towards the future improvements at Dutton Avenue/Bellevue Avenue to install a traffic signal unless such costs are included in a traffic impact fee.

• Pedestrian, bicyce, and transit facilities serving the project site are expected to be adequate with the completion of project frontage improvements.

• Sight distances along Dutton Avenue at the project driveway are adequate for the approach speeds; however, parking should be prohibited along the project frontage for a distance of 50 feet on either side of the proposed driveway.

• A southbound left-turn lane is warranted under Future plus Project volumes during the p.m. peak period. The frontage improvements should be constructed to accommodate a center turn lane on Dutton Avenue in the future, providing left-turn access at the project driveway.

65 Recommended Mitigation Measures:

• Parking shall be prohibited for a distance of 50 ft. on either side of the project entrance. This shall be shown on the improvement plans.

• As part of the Project Description and offered by the applicant, an all-way stop controls, restriping of the southbound Standish Avenue approach to include a left-turn lane and the restriping of the westbound Todd Road approach to include a right turn lane at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue will be installed.

• A proportional share contribution of 2.2 percent of the costs funded by private development shall be paid towards the future improvements at Todd Road/Standish Avenue-Ghilotti Avenue to install a traffic signal unless such costs are included in a traffic impact fee.

• A proportional share contribution of 4.5 percent of the costs funded by private development shall be paid towards the future improvements at Dutton Avenue/Bellevue Avenue to install a traffic signal unless such costs are included in a traffic impact fee.

XVI. (c - d) No Impact. The project site is located ±11 miles from the Charles M. Schultz/Sonoma County Airport, and is outside of the Airport Land Use Plan planning area. The project site is not located near a public or private airport. The project will not impact air traffic patterns. The project has incorporated pedestrian, bicycle and transit features.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

XVI. (e – f) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project will enhance pedestrian, bicycle and public transportation opportunities through the inclusion of bicycle lockers, bicycle parking, access to the SMART pedestrian path and connection to the overall City of Santa Rosa bicycle lane network. During construction the following mitigation measures are required to minimize traffic congestion and traffic hazards.

Recommended Mitigation Measures

Emergency Response/Traffic Control

The applicant shall a dopt the following traffic control procedures to minimize traffic congestion and traffic hazards. As required, construction flagging and signage, use of plates, and other safety measures shall be in conformance with Caltrans 2006 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Other measures shall include:
• If temporary lane or street closures are required, the applicant shall contact emergency response providers (i.e., hospitals, police, fire, and ambulance) to determine if the streets impacted are considered primary routes.
• Where construction necessitates lane or street closures along emergency response routes, the applicant shall recommend and obtain approval of alternate routes or other means from the affected service providers, at a minimum of one week prior to construction. 66 • During construction, the applicant shall notify the service providers on a weekly basis of the timing, location, and duration of construction.
• The applicant shall maintain pedestrian and vehicular access to public facilities, businesses, and residences along the street during commute hours and shall minimize the closure of pedestrian and vehicular access at other times. Peak commute hours are between 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 19.

67 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
effects?

c. Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?

d. Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new
or expanded entitlements needed?

e. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing commitments?

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?

68 Discussion:

XVII. (a-g). Less than Significant Impact. The Project would develop a vacant property into a medium density residential project of 107 apartment units. The Project can be served by City water and wastewater treatment facilities and storm water drainage facilities. All improvements necessary as part of Project development will be done in compliance with the latest adopted city standards. The project is a medium density residential designated site, development of which is fully consistent with the General Plan. Standard City conditions will require compliance with the Storm Water Mitigation Plan Guidelines, including implementation of measures requiring use of best management practices.

Adequate landfill capacity would continue to exist at County and/or County contracted facilities to support future development.

Recommended Mitigation Measures: None required.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 11, 16, 17.

Comment: The Project’s Utilities and Services Systems impacts are Less than Significant. The Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 EIR determined that through the implementation of the Santa Rosa General Plan 2035 policies all Utilities and Services System impacts including potential cumulative impact would be Less than Significant (GP EIR Table 2-1: G-1 through G-6). The Project is consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan. Through the application of Standard Conditions of Approval, the Project will adhere to all Best Management Practices regarding water use and water quality. The Project has been found to have no Utilities and Service Systems impacts.

69 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:
a. Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?

c. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?

Discussion:

XVIII. (a) Less Than Significant Impact: The project is located within the Santa Rosa Urban Growth Boundary and potential impacts associated with its development have been anticipated by the City’s General Plan and analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation, goals, policies and programs. The project will not degrade the quality of the environment, reduce habitat, or affect cultural resources. Therefore, the project’s impact as regards environmental degradation is considered less than significant.

XVIII. (b) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation for the site and the City’s long-range plan for future development. The project does not increase the severity of any of the impacts from the levels identified and analyzed in 70 the General Plan EIR. The project does not have the potential to create impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the project’s cumulative impacts will be less than significant.

XVIII. (c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project has the potential to result in adverse impacts to humans due to air quality, water quality, cultural resources, noise, and transportation and circulation.

However, with the application of Standard Conditions of Approval, implementation of Best Management Practices and adherence to applicable goals and polices, the Project’s direct, indirect and cumulative impacts are considered Less than Significant.

Sources: 1 through 19

71 72

SOURCE REFERENCES

The following is a list of references used in the preparation of this document. Unless attached herein, copies of all reference reports, memorandums and letters are on file with the City of Santa Rosa Planning and Economic Development Department. References to Publications prepared by Federal or State agencies may be found with the agency responsible for providing such information.

1. City of Santa Rosa General Plan 2035, 2009

2. City of Santa Rosa Final EIR, 2009

3. City of Santa Rosa Zoning Code, 2006

4. City of Santa Rosa Design Guidelines, September 2005 (updated in 2010, 2011)

5. City of Santa Rosa Climate Action Plan

6. City of Santa Rosa Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Ordinance 4051, adopted October 27, 2015

7. Santa Rosa City Code: Title 17 Environmental Protection Chapter 17-24: Trees (Ordinance 2858, 1990; Ordinance 3699, 2005)

8. Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines, May 2010

9. BAAQMD Website and Significance Thresholds, 2010

10. SoilWeb University of California at Davis; NRCS

11. Project Plans:
a. Architectural
b. Landscaping
c. Grading and Drainage

12. Biological Baseline Summary and Impact Evaluation for the Site at 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County. Charles A. Patterson Plant Ecologist, April 27, 2017.

13. Biological Resource Assessment 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA. Ted P.

Winfield, Ph.D. August 14, 2017.

14. Historical Resources Study of 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. Tom Origer & Associates. March 6, 2017.

15. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, California.

Environmental Geology Services. July 12, 2016.

16. Soils Investigation 3150 Dutton Avenue Santa Rosa, California. YES! Young Engineering Services, Geotechnical Consultants. September 21, 2001.

73 17. Initial Storm Water Low Impact Development Submittal for 3150 Dutton Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA. Adobe Associates, Inc. Civil Engineering, Land Surveying, Wastewater. July 17, 2017.

18. Environmental Noise Assessment 3150 Dutton Avenue Santa Rosa, Ca. Illingworth & Rodkin, Acoustical • Air Quality. April 4, 2017.

19. Traffic Impact Study for a Residential Project at 3150 Dutton Avenue. W-Trans, Traffic Engineers. December 14, 2016

DUTTON AVENUE DEVELOPMENT

3150 Dutton Avenue
Assessor Parcel No.: 043-133-013

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Lead Agency:

City of Santa Rosa
Planning and Economic Development Department
100 Santa Rosa Ave., Rm. 3
Santa Rosa, CA 95404

Contact: Patrick Streeter, Senior Planner

Date: October 9, 2018

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that when a public agency has made findings that mitigation measures are required to avoid or substantially lessen significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the agency shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the mitigation to ensure the mitigation measures are implemented. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to ensure the effective implementation of the mitigation measures that the Design Review Board adopted as part of its approval of the Dutton Avenue Development Project.

The City of Santa Rosa, as the lead agency for the project, is responsible for enforcing and verifying that each mitigation measure is implemented. The MMRP establishes the framework the City will use to implement the mitigation measures adopted in connection with project approval, and the monitoring/reporting of such implementation.

Mitigation Measure Compliance
Documentation
Timing Responsible
Party
Status Date of
Completion
Air Quality
COA: Dust and Exhaust Controls
The contractor shall implement
the following best management
practices that are required
of all projects:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g.,
parking areas, staging areas, soil
piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access- roads shall be watered
two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting
soil, sand, or other loose material
off-site shall be covered.

3. 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.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved
roads shall be limited to 15 miles
per hour (mph).

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Post a publicly visible sign
with the telephone number and
Documentation that the
requirements have been
incorporated into the
construction contracts.

Documentation of
compliance to be provided
during construction.

During any
construction
period ground
disturbance.

Project
applicant or
his designee
for submittal
of required
information.

Department of
Planning and
Economic
Development
prior to permit
issuance.

Building
Division
during site
review.

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.

Cultural Resources
COA-CUL-1: Archaeological
Resources
If archaeological remains are
uncovered, work at the place of
discovery should be halted
immediately until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the finds.

Prehistoric archaeological site
indicators include: obsidian and chert
flakes and chipped stone tools;
grinding and mashing implements
(e.g., slabs and handstones, and
mortars and pestles); bedrock
outcrops and boulders with mortar
cups; and locally darkened midden
soils. Midden soils may contain a
combination of any of the previously
listed items with the possible addition
of bone and shell remains, and fire
affected stones. Historic period site
indicators generally include:
fragments of glass, ceramic, and
metal objects; milled and split
lumber; and structure and feature
remain such as building foundations
and discrete trash deposits (e.g.,
wells, privy pits, dumps).

COA-CUL-2-BR-2: Human
Remains
If human remains are
encountered, all activities in the
immediate vicinity of the find and
with an adequate buffer zone will
be halted and, in accordance with
California Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5, the County
Coroner will be notified and
permitted to assess the remains.

Further, pursuant to California
Public Resources Code Section
5097.98(b) remains shall be left
in place and free from disturbance
until a final decision as to the

If archaeological remains are
uncovered, work at the place
of discovery should be
halted immediately until a
qualified archaeologist can
evaluate the finds.

Department of Planning and
Economic Development
shall be notified.

If human remains are
uncovered, work at the place
of discovery should be
halted immediately and the
County Coroner notified.

During any
construction
period ground
disturbance.

Project
applicant or
his designee
for
notification.

treatment and disposition has
been made. If the County Coroner
determines the remains to be
Native American, the Native
American Heritage Commission
shall be contacted within a
reasonable timeframe.

Subsequently, the Native
American Heritage Commission
shall identify the “most likely
descendant.” The most likely
descendant shall then make
recommendations and engage in
consultation concerning the
treatment of the remains as
provided in Public Resources
Code 5097.98.

Noise
MM-NOISE -1: Internal
Environment
Attaining the necessary noise
reduction from exterior-to-interior
spaces is readily achievable with
proper wall construction
techniques, the selections of
proper windows and doors, and
the incorporation of forced-air
mechanical ventilation systems.

Said techniques are as follows:
• The units in Building D
along the northern, southern,
and eastern façades, shall
use windows and sliding
glass doors with STC ratings
of STC 35 to 38. Along the
western façade of Building
D, windows and sliding
glass doors with STC ratings
of STC 28 to 31 would be
required.
• The units in Buildings A and
B along the northern,
southern, and western
façades, shall use windows
and sliding glass doors with
STC ratings of STC 26 to

28. The remaining interior
would need windows and
sliding glass doors with STC
ratings of STC 26 to 31 to
achieve interior noise

Documentation that the
requirements have been
incorporated into the
construction contracts.

Documentation of
compliance to be provided
during construction.

Prior to and
during
construction.

Project
applicant or
his designee
for submittal
of required
information.

Department of
Planning and
Economic
Development
prior to permit
issuance.

Building
Division
during site
review.

standards. All of the units in
the proposed buildings
should also be provided
some form of forced-air
mechanical ventilation,
satisfactory to the local
building official, to
adequately ventilate the
interior space of the units
when windows are closed to
control noise.

MM-NOISE -2: Construction
• Muffle and maintain all
equipment used on site. All
internal combustion engine-
driven equipment shall be
fitted with mufflers, which
are in good condition. Good
mufflers shall result in non-
impact tools generating a
maximum noise level of 80
dB when measured at a
distance of 50 feet.
• Utilize “quiet” models of air
compressors and other
stationary noise sources
where technology exists.
• Locate stationary noise-
generating equipment as far
as possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive
receptors adjoin or are near
a construction project area.
• Prohibit unnecessary idling
of internal combustion
engines.
• Prohibit construction
workers’ radios which are
audible on adjoining
properties.
• Restrict noise-generating
activities at the construction
site or in areas adjacent to
the construction site to the
hours between 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, and 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Saturdays, with no
construction is permitted on
Sundays and holidays.
• Do not allow machinery to
be cleaned or serviced past
7:00 p.m. or prior to 7:00
a.m. Monday through
Friday.
• Limit the allowable hours
for the delivery of materials
or equipment to the site and
truck traffic coming to and
from the site for any purpose
to Monday through Friday
between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m.
• Allowable construction
hours shall be posted clearly
on a sign at the construction
site.
• The construction contractor
shall designate a “noise
disturbance coordinator”
who will be responsible for
responding to any local
complaints about
construction noise. A
telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator shall
be conspicuously posted at
the construction site. The
Disturbance Coordinator
shall:
• Receive and act on
complaints about
construction
disturbances during site
clearing, excavation,
infrastructure
installation, road
building, residential
construction, and site
other construction
activities.
• Determine
the cause(s) and
implement
remedial
measures as
necessary to
alleviate
significant
problems.
• Clearly post his/her
name and phone
number(s) on a sign at
the construction site.
• Notify area
residents of
construction activities,
schedules, and potential
impacts.

Transportation/Traffic
MM-TRANS/TRAFFIC- 1:

Road Improvements
• Parking shall be prohibited
for a distance of 50 ft. on
either side of the project
entrance. This shall be
shown on the improvement
plans.

• A proportional share
contribution of 2.2 percent of
the costs funded by private
development shall be paid
towards the future
improvements at Todd
Road/Standish Avenue-
Ghilotti Avenue to install a
traffic signal unless such
costs are included in a traffic
impact fee.

• A proportional share
contribution of 4.5 percent of
the costs funded by private
development shall be paid
towards the future
improvements at Dutton
Avenue/Bellevue Avenue to
install a traffic signal unless
such costs are included in a
traffic impact fee.

MM-TRANS/TRAFFIC- 2:

Traffic Control
The applicant shall adopt the
following traffic control
procedures to minimize traffic
congestion and traffic hazards. As
required, construction flagging
and signage, use of plates, and
other safety measures shall be in
conformance with Caltrans 2006
Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devises. Other measures
shall include:
• If temporary lane or street
closures are required, the
applicant shall contact

The site plan shall reflect no
parking 50 ft. on either side
of the project entrance.

Documentation of
compliance to be provided at
Building Permit.

Documentation that
requirements have been

Prior to final
Design Review.

Project
applicant or
their designee
for submittal
of required
information.

Department of
Planning and
Economic
Development.

emergency response
providers (i.e., hospitals,
police, fire, and ambulance)
to determine if the streets
impacted are considered
primary routes.
• Where construction
necessitates lane or street
closures along emergency
response routes, the applicant
shall recommend and obtain
approval of alternate routes or
other means from the affected
service providers, at a
minimum of one week prior
to construction.
• During construction, the
applicant shall notify the
service providers on a weekly
basis of the timing, location,
and duration of construction.
• The applicant shall maintain
pedestrian and vehicular
access to public facilities,
businesses, and residences
along the street during
commute hours and shall
minimize the closure of
pedestrian and vehicular
access at other times. Peak
commute hours are between
7:00 AM - 9:00 AM and 4:00
PM - 6:00 PM.

incorporated into
construction documents.

Documentation of
compliance to be provided
during construction.

Prior to and
during
construction.

Santa Rosa City CouncilJune 3, 2025

Santa Rosa City Council
June 3, 2025