Santa Rosa City Council
August 18, 2026

SOUTH SANTA ROSA

SPECIFIC PLAN

ALTERNATIVES REPORT
JANUARY 2026
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan

SOUTH SANTA ROSA

SPECIFIC PLAN

ALTERNATIVES REPORT
JANUARY 2026
Prepared by

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................. ..................................................11

1.1 Project Background and Purpose1.1 Project Background and Purpose ................................................................... ...................................................................11

1.2 Planning Area and Regional Context1.2 Planning Area and Regional Context ............................................................ ............................................................33

1.3 Purpose of the Report 1.3 Purpose of the Report .................................................................................... ....................................................................................33

1.4 Report Organization1.4 Report Organization ....................................................................................... .......................................................................................44 2 APPROACH AND BASELINE ASSUMPTIONS2 APPROACH AND BASELINE ASSUMPTIONS ....... ....... 55

2.1 Existing Land Use Pattern2.1 Existing Land Use Pattern ................................................................................ ................................................................................55

2.2 Opportunities for Change2.2 Opportunities for Change .............................................................................. ..............................................................................88 3 ALTERNATIVES3 ALTERNATIVES .................................................... ....................................................1111

3.1 Alternative 1: Mixed-Use Corridor3.1 Alternative 1: Mixed-Use Corridor .............................................................. ..............................................................1111

3.2 Alternative 2: City-Centered Growth3.2 Alternative 2: City-Centered Growth .......................................................... ..........................................................1414

3.3 Alternative 3: Centers3.3 Alternative 3: Centers ................................................................................... ...................................................................................1717

3.4 Comparison of Alternatives3.4 Comparison of Alternatives ......................................................................... ......................................................................... 2020 4 TRANSPORTATION IMPLICATIONS4 TRANSPORTATION IMPLICATIONS ................... ...................2323

4.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)4.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)..............................................................................................................................................2323

4.2 Residential VMT4.2 Residential VMT..........................................................................................................................................................................................2424

4.3 Employment VMT4.3 Employment VMT .......................................................................................... ..........................................................................................2424

4.4 Total VMT per Service Population4.4 Total VMT per Service Population ............................................................... ...............................................................2424

4.5 Roadway Congestion Levels 4.5 Roadway Congestion Levels ...................................................................... ......................................................................2525

4.6 Walking, Biking, and Transit4.6 Walking, Biking, and Transit................................................................................................................................................ 2929 5 NEXT STEPS5 NEXT STEPS ........................................................ ........................................................3232

5.1 Community Outreach5.1 Community Outreach .................................................................................... ....................................................................................3232

5.2 Specific Plan Development5.2 Specific Plan Development .......................................................................... ..........................................................................3232

LIST OF TABLESLIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1: Proposed Alternative Buildout EstimatesTable 3-1: Proposed Alternative Buildout Estimates ......................................... .........................................2020 Table 3-2: Proposed Density RangesTable 3-2: Proposed Density Ranges ................................................................ ................................................................2020 Table 4-1: Summary of Non-Auto Mode CharacteristicsTable 4-1: Summary of Non-Auto Mode Characteristics ................................ ................................3131

LIST OF FIGURESLIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Planning AreaFigure 1-1: Planning Area ...................................................................................... ......................................................................................22 Figure 2-1: Existing Land UseFigure 2-1: Existing Land Use ................................................................................ ................................................................................66 Figure 2-2: General Plan Land UseFigure 2-2: General Plan Land Use ...................................................................... ......................................................................77 Figure 2-3: Vacant and Underutilized SitesFigure 2-3: Vacant and Underutilized Sites ...................................................... ...................................................... 1010 Figure 3-1: Alternative 1 ConceptFigure 3-1: Alternative 1 Concept ...................................................................... ......................................................................1212 Figure 3-2: Alternative 1 Land UseFigure 3-2: Alternative 1 Land Use ................................................................... ................................................................... 1313 Figure 3-3: Alternative 2 ConceptFigure 3-3: Alternative 2 Concept ..................................................................... .....................................................................1515 Figure 3-4: Alternative 2 Land UseFigure 3-4: Alternative 2 Land Use ................................................................... ................................................................... 1616 Figure 3-5: Alternative 3 Concept Figure 3-5: Alternative 3 Concept ........................................................................................................................................ 1818 Figure 3-6: Alternative 3 Land UseFigure 3-6: Alternative 3 Land Use ................................................................... ...................................................................1919 Figure 3-7: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Non-Residential Figure 3-7: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Non-Residential UsesUses ...................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................2121 Figure 3-8: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Residential Uses 21Figure 3-8: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Residential Uses 21 Figure 4-1: Comparison of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Characteristics 23Figure 4-1: Comparison of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Characteristics 23 Figure 4-2: Alternative 1 Projected Congestion LevelsFigure 4-2: Alternative 1 Projected Congestion Levels .................................... ....................................2626 Figure 4-3: Alternative 2 Projected Congestion LevelsFigure 4-3: Alternative 2 Projected Congestion Levels .................................... ....................................2727 Figure 4-4: Alternative 3 Projected Congestion LevelsFigure 4-4: Alternative 3 Projected Congestion Levels .................................... ....................................2828 New residential developments in south Santa Rosa.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
1 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

AND PURPOSE
The City of Santa Rosa is preparing a Specific Plan for South Santa Rosa to guide development through 2050,
synchronized with the 2050 General Plan adopted in
2025. The South Santa Rosa Specific Plan (SSRSP , the
Plan) will develop a vision for the future of the Planning Area and will address land use designations, density and intensity of development, and necessary infrastructure
and public facilities in greater detail than the General Plan.

The SSRSP encompasses an area of 1,900 acres, 1,400
acres of which are unincorporated Sonoma County.

Outlined as an area of change in the City’s General
Plan, the Planning Area includes both a portion of the
City’s Mendocino Avenue/Santa Rosa Avenue Corridor
Priority Development Area (PDA) and the County’s
South Santa Rosa Area PDA, which encompasses the
Moorland neighborhood. The Planning Area is shown in
Figure 1-1.

The SSRSP will develop a vision for land use, circulation and infrastructure, including development and public
realm standards, community health and equity policies,
capital improvements, and parks, coupled with necessary implementation actions and investment priorities. The
Plan will seek to set the stage for diverse, amenity-rich housing development as well as neighborhood-serving
commercial uses, to meet the needs of the various
neighborhoods within the Planning Area, as well
as commercial and industrial uses. Comprehensive,
integrated planning will foster cohesive development
patterns and ensure that environmental considerations
are reflected in the Specific Plan. The Plan will also outline unified City/County policies for this area, providing the basis for any future annexations of the unincorporated
County land.

The SSRSP will play a foundational role in regulating
land use in the Plan Area; it will be a high-level planning document that provides direction for all zoning
regulations, ordinances, and guidelines. The goals and
policies throughout the SSRSP will be interrelated and
should be considered together when making decisions
related to land use, mobility, growth, and development.

Figure 1-1: Planning Area
Andy Lopez Unity Park
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
3 1.2 PLANNING AREA AND

REGIONAL CONTEXT
The City of Santa Rosa is the seat of Sonoma County
and a business, retail, and service hub for the North Bay and surrounding areas. The SSRSP will guide the future
development of a 1,900-acre area in southern Santa Rosa, approximately 1,400 acres of which are unincorporated.

The entire area is part of the City’s coterminous Sphere of Influence and Urban Growth Boundary and is covered
by the recently adopted City of Santa Rosa General Plan 2050. The Planning Area covers areas along Santa Rosa
Avenue within the City of Santa Rosa and unincorporated Sonoma County, as well as the unincorporated County
area on the west side of Highway 101, including the
Moorland neighborhood and industrial areas to the
south. As the Planning Area covers both City and
County jurisdictions, inter-jurisdictional collaboration is integral to this plan.

The overall Planning Area is relatively large, with
overlapping City and County jurisdictions and checkered utility service providers and jurisdictions including four sanitary sewer providers. Cohesive planning will require working with a diverse number of services providers,
maintaining agreement between the City and the County
on a unified direction, and coordination with the many
businesses and residents in the area.

The Planning Area also contains one of Santa Rosa’s
two Disadvantaged Communities tracts as identified
by CalEnviroScreen and the SB 535 screening process.

This area extends from Bellevue Avenue down to the
southern extent of the Planning Area, west of Highway
101, and includes the Moorland neighborhood. Each of
the Alternatives presented in this report seek to enhance the quality of life in this area through increased access to commercial areas and other resources, and to integrate
the neighborhood more with the larger Santa Rosa
community. The City has also identified Equity Priority Areas (EPA) in the recent General Plan Update; within
the Planning Area, the areas west of Highway 101 and
north of Burt Street are identified as EPAs. These areas are prioritized in the General Plan for growth and improved access to services.

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
The Alternatives Report is a key step in the Specific Plan process and provides an opportunity for the community
to consider how South Santa Rosa will look in the future, where growth will occur, and what areas to conserve.

The Alternatives present variations in the location
and density of future housing, park and open space
improvements. They reflect different ways to achieve the fundamental goals of the General Plan Update, aligning
with the community vision and policies outlined in the
General Plan.

The land use Alternatives focus on sites where growth
possibilities exist. Of the 1,900 acres in the Planning Area, approximately 240 acres are vacant and approximately 240 acres are underutilized, excluding development concepts that have not yet been approved. These conditions
provide significant development opportunities and allow for creativity in land use alternatives.

Feedback from community members and decision-
makers on these Alternatives will lead to the formulation of a Preferred Alternative, which will serve as the
foundation of the SSRSP . The Preferred Alternative
may align closely with one of the Alternative scenarios presented in this report, although it will likely result from a combination of Alternatives and incorporate new ideas generated during public discussions and community
outreach.

Based upon the Preferred Alternative, infrastructure,
transportation, and more detailed open space
improvements will be identified and incorporated into
the final Specific Plan. The Preferred Alternative will serve as the foundation for establishing the goals, policies, and actions necessary to achieve the community’s vision.

Todd Road
Alternatives Report
4 1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION
This report presents the Alternatives in five chapters:

1. Introduction and Purpose: Report purpose and
SSRSP project background.

2. Approach and Baseline Assumptions: An
overview of the existing land use pattern and
opportunity sites analysis to establish the baseline.

3. Alternatives: Text, statistics, and maps of
potential options for land use changes to describe
the three development strategies comprising the
Alternatives.

4. Transportation Implications: A more in-
depth review of transportation and circulation
implications through vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) and multi-modal mobility in each of the
Alternatives.

5. Next Steps: Activities and outcomes following
this report include community outreach on this
report, creating the Preferred Alternative report,
and adoption of the specific plan and EIR.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
5 2 APPROACH

AND BASELINE

ASSUMPTIONS

2.1 EXISTING LAND USE

PATTERN
The Planning Area includes the transition from the City limits to unincorporated Sonoma County. As shown in
Figure 2-1, land uses throughout the Planning Area are
highly diverse with significant reuse possibilities along Santa Rosa Avenue and many other underutilized sites,
as well as substantial undeveloped land at the eastern and western edges of the Planning Area. There are pockets
of long-standing residential uses, including apartments and residential subdivisions in the incorporated portions east of Santa Rosa Avenue, as well as the unincorporated Moorland neighborhood to the southwest. Highway 101
runs through the middle of the Planning Area, effectively dividing the areas east and west of the highway with
limited connections between the eastern and western
portions. Santa Rosa Avenue extends through the full
four-mile stretch of the Planning Area and runs parallel to Highway 101. The Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit
(SMART) passes through the Planning Area parallel to
Highway 101 with the closest station two miles south of the southern extent of the Planning Area in Rohnert Park.

Current transit service to the Planning Area consists of CityBus service on both Santa Rosa Avenue to Elsa Drive (Route 3) and service on Petaluma Hill Road to Y olanda Avenue to Santa Rosa Avenue to Kawana Springs Road
(Route 5). Sonoma County Transit service is present on
Santa Rosa Avenue throughout the Planning Area (Route
44/48) and from Santa Rosa Avenue to Hearn Avenue
overcrossing to Corby Avenue and to Moorland Avenue
(Route 42). The Planning Area is served by these transit routes through approximately 45 bus stops. Santa Rosa
Avenue is lined with commercial uses including building supplies, construction and farming equipment sales,
auto-dealers, motels, mobile home parks, gas stations,
and shopping centers. There are a significant number of vacant and underutilized sites along the Avenue.

The northern part of the Planning Area is within the City limits and is closer to the City center. It is anchored by large shopping centers including Santa Rosa Marketplace shopping center, with Costco, Target, and other retailers which provide Santa Rosa with many goods. This area
has seen significant new multi-family development
concentrated near the shopping center, but older
industrial and repair uses, motels, some single-family and multi-family homes are also present. Some vacant land
is located adjacent to single-family residential, business strips, and industrial uses existing along Petaluma Hill Road, Barham, Flower, and Santa Rosa avenues. Kawana
Springs Creek runs north of the Santa Rosa Marketplace
shopping center. Harvest Park and Red Hawk Park are the two parks within the northern portion of the Planning
Area, and several other parks are located just outside the Planning Area: South Davis Park west of Highway 101,
Martin Luther King Jr. Park east of Petaluma Hill Road
with Newhall Bike and Pedestrian Path, and Colgan
Creek Park east of Santa Rosa Marketplace shopping
center. Kawana Springs Community Park is a planned
19-acre community park located just east of the Planning Area.

In the southern, unincorporated portion of the Planning Area, Highway 101 and the SMART rail corridor
create strong physical divisions between the eastern
and western areas, while creeks and waterways further
segment the landscape into areas with distinct land use patterns. The western unincorporated area is dominated
by industrial uses with a handful of public/institutional, single-family residential, and vacant areas. Between
the SMART tracks and Highway 101 is the Moorland
neighborhood, which accounts for most of the residential area in the southern part of the Planning Area. The area is mostly single-family and multi-family residential, with Andy Lopez Unity Park and some vacant areas. There
are minimal commercial uses. West and south of the
Moorland neighborhood are more industrial and vacant
uses, waterways, and a handful of commercial uses. In
the eastern unincorporated area, there are some multi-
family residential and mobile homes. Taylor Mountain
Elementary School is located near Todd Creek, which
runs from the northeast to the southwest portions of the Plan Area. The rest of the eastern unincorporated part of the Planning Area is undeveloped. Commercial uses are
concentrated along Santa Rosa Avenue.

The recently adopted General Plan largely maintains
existing land uses. Several vacant sites in the northern part of the Planning Area are designated Retail and
Business Services to match much of the surrounding
uses, and large vacant areas in the eastern part of the Planning Area are designated Low to Medium Density
Residential. The southwest area is designated Industrial to align with the neighboring uses, and the area east of Highway 101 and south of Todd Road is designated Re-
tail and Business Services uses. The current General Plan Land Use is shown in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-1: Existing Land Use
Figure 2-2: General Plan Land Use
Alternatives Report
8 2.2 OPPORTUNITIES FOR
CHANGE

OPPORTUNITY SITES ANALYSIS
As the City of Santa Rosa considers how and where future housing and employment growth can be accommodated
over the next 20+ years, it is important to consider sites that present an opportunity for new development or
redevelopment. “Opportunity sites” are those that have
the greatest potential for change in land use types or
intensities over the extended planning horizon. Given
that most land is privately owned, and development of
private property is contingent upon the initiative of
property owners, it is not possible to precisely determine which sites will change in land use type or intensity.

However, analysis of site conditions, existing land use and development intensities, market forces, lease agreements, and other considerations can provide a strong indication of the pattern of where such changes are likely to occur.

The opportunity sites in the Plan Area were identified
and refined through both data-driven analysis of
development potential and site-specific knowledge of
existing conditions and development approvals that are
currently being actively pursued. Opportunity sites were initially identified by mapping vacant and underutilized land within the Planning Area, filtering out sites with natural environmental constraints such as sensitive
habitat. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) documents flood risk, including the Santa
Rosa Creek Watershed. In July 2025, FEMA released
preliminary updated flood maps—not yet adopted—
to identify high-risk zones known as Special Flood
Hazard Areas (SFHAs). These maps are anticipated to
be adopted and effective in Spring of 2027. Within the
Planning Area, the preliminary flood maps identify the
area north of Santa Rosa Marketplace and concentrated
around Santa Rosa Avenue as a SFHA. While these areas
were not excluded from identifying opportunity sites, it is important to consider additional nuance, as properties located in the SFHAs will be subject to stricter building standards and may be required to carry flood insurance.

More information on how this should be considered
when assessing Alternatives is included below, and
information on the flood mapping project itself can be
found on the City’s website here.

Underutilized sites were determined by assessing the
amount of existing development on the site compared
to overall site size. These ratios are widely used planning tools that give a sense of the intensity of development possible on a property. While the opportunity sites were refined to be specific to each Alternative, the sites that are common to each Alternative are shown in Figure 2-3
with vacant sites called out as Tier 1 opportunities for redevelopment while underutilized sites are considered
Tier 2.

The largest vacant areas are in the eastern part of the Planning Area, on the perimeter of Taylor Mountain
Elementary School both north and south of Bellevue
Avenue, and near or including the creeks. The northern
portion of the Planning Area and the Moorland
neighborhood have some underutilized sites currently
designated for low and medium-low density housing.

The area west of the SMART tracks and south of Todd
Road has a high mix of vacant and underutilized sites.

Existing low density development could be replaced with new development.

The Planning Area has several creekways that can provide an open space framework.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
9 PIPELINE PROJECTS
The most significant potential development concept
within the Planning Area is the Todd Creek Annexation
site, which encompasses approximately 282.5 acres of
vacant, unincorporated land in the eastern portion of the Planning Area. While no formal development application
has been submitted at this time, a conceptual development scenario, which aligns with the established land uses
in the General Plan 2050, has been discussed. This
conceptual development would include annexation of the
area and construction of approximately 1,700 housing
units at a range of low- to medium-density, along with
approximately 10 acres of new park space and 17 acres
of creek corridor open space. For purposes of long-range planning and infrastructure analysis, this report assumes a reasonable development scenario at this site consistent with the conceptual plan, including approximately 1,700 housing units, to evaluate potential growth patterns and infrastructure needs.

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
The General Plan identifies opportunities for two new
community parks and up to five new neighborhood
parks within the Planning Area. Specific parkland
dedication/acquisition will be considered along with
proposed development to meet the City parkland
standard of 6 acres per 1,000 residents, and access
standards of accessibility to a neighborhood park and a community park within a 10-minute and 20-minute walk
respectively. Opportunities also exist for greenways and trail parks to be developed along existing creek corridors within the project area to support recreational and active transportation goals.

In addition to site-specific pedestrian and bicycle
improvements and planned improvements identified in
the City’s Active Transportation Plan, the Santa Rosa
CityBus Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) has identified
potential transit enhancements in the Planning Area.

These include an opportunity to better connect travel
across Highway 101 via the recently-improved Hearn
Avenue overcrossing and planned extension of Route 12
as well as proposed increases to service frequencies on Santa Rosa Avenue, particularly south of Elsa Drive with extensions to Todd Road and Moorland Avenue. CityBus
also has future plans to increase north-south service to Moorland Avenue from Sebastopol Road. Finally, there
is an opportunity for the City to develop a mobility hub supporting transit service, park-and-ride, and shared
mobility services in south Santa Rosa, facilitating the transition from single-occupancy vehicles to transit, as well as transfers between transit routes and carpooling.

C I T Y O F S A N TA RO S A

C O U N T Y O F S O N O M A
Brooks Ave
Stony Point Rd
Stony Point Rd
Stony Point Rd
Santa Rosa Ave
Santa Rosa A
ve
Moorland Ave
Dutton Ave
W Hear
nAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn Ave
Hearn Ave
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
Corby
Ave
Corby Ave
Ma le
Aston Ave
Bennett Valle
y Rd
Dutton Meadow
W 3Rd St
T odd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
E Robles Ave
Ne
w
mark Dr
Snyder Ln
Holly Ave
S A S
t
West Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank Ave
Occidental
Rd
Bellevue Ave
S Moorland Ave
Bellevue Ave
Burgess Dr
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wiljan
Ct
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standi
sh
Ave
Dowd Dr
Fairway Dr
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E T odd Rd
Y olanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Primrose Ave
Hargrave Ave Whistler Ave
Langer
Ave
Santa
Rosa
Town
Center
Santa
Rosa
Southside
Santa
Rosa
Center
Shopping
Center
Newhall
Bike Path
Pearblossom
Trail
B e l l
evue -W i l f r e dC h an n e l
To d d
C r e e k
To d d C
ree k
R o s e l a n d C r e e k
Co lgan C
ree k
C o l g
an
Cr e
ek
C
o l
gan C r e e
k
R o s e l a n d C r e e k
Co lg an C reek
M o o r l a n d C r e e k
O l d C o l g a n C r e e k
H unt e rC r e e k H u n t e r C r e e k
W i l f r e d C r e e k
To d d C r e e k ( E a s tF o r k)
Wi l fr e d C h a n n e l W i l f r e d C h a n n e l
K aw ana S prin g s Cree k
K aw ana
Spring s
Cr e e k
Martin
Luther
King Jr. Park
Olive Park
Bayer
Park And
Gardens
Southwest
Community
Park
Colgan
Creek Park
Harvest Park
Taylor Mountain
Regional Park
Dauenhauer Park
Bellevue
Ranch Park
Red Hawk Park
South
Davis Park
Paul &
Gloria
Golis Park
Andy Lopez
Unity Park
Bellevue Union
Elementary
Office
Bellevue
School
Kawana
Springs
Elementary
Meadow View
Elementary
Roseland
Elementary
Office
Roseland
Elementary
Sheppard
Elementary
Allen
(Elsie)
High
Midrose High
(Cont.)
Stevens (Robert
L.) Elementary Roseland
Accelerated
Middle School
Taylor Mountain
Elementary School
Roseland
Creek
Elementary
Sonoma
Academy
Roseland
University
Prep
Amarosa
Academy
Underutilized Sites
Tier 1 - Vacant
Tier 2 - Underutilized Sites
Pipeline
Existing Residential
South Santa Rosa
Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Path: J:\GISData\603 South Santa Rosa\GIS\Projects\Alternatives\Alternatives.aprxSource: City of Santa Rosa, 2025; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025. 0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
Mile
20 Acres
5 Acres
¯
Map Date:
9/25/2025
Notes:

Assessor data for calculating FAR and AV/Ratio was included in the parcel attributes provided by the City of Santa Rosa.

The date of the assessor data is unknown.

Existing Residential was provided by the City of Santa Rosa as an EXLU shapefile which is separate from the parcel data. The geometries of the EXLU and and parcel data are not always congruent.
?Ý?Ý
IÆ
Figure 2-3: Vacant and Underutilized Sites
Housing in the Moorland neighborhood.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
11 3 AL TERNATIVES
The following chapter presents an overview of the three land use Alternatives presented in this report. While
each Alternative responds to community priorities such
as furthering a mix of available housing opportunities
and a mix of housing types, focusing development in
the corridors to promote proximity to daily services, and continue promoting jobs opportunities in the City, there are some differences in how the three scenarios approach future growth in South Santa Rosa. Section 3.4 provides a comparison of the Alternatives.

3.1 ALTERNATIVE 1: MIXED-USE

CORRIDOR
Alternative 1 focuses on a mixed-use corridor as shown
in Figures 3-1, illustrating the general concept, and 3-2, indicating where and what type of development may
occur. It reimagines the central stretch of Santa Rosa
Avenue—where vacant sites and reuse opportunities
are the greatest—as a pedestrian-friendly boulevard,
featuring ground-floor, neighborhood-serving
commercial uses, along with higher-density housing. The largest development opportunities in the corridor are in the stretch between Todd Road and Robles Avenue.

Retail uses will be in strategic locations rather than
located along the entire corridor stretch. Some buildings may have ground level retail, while in other cases only residential uses might be present. Larger sites may be
developed with a horizontal mix of uses, with residential density “transferred” from the portion developed only
with retail to other portions of the site developed with residential uses only. A commercial center is proposed
just south of Robles Road, to provide goods and services where most residents can easily access them. The
maximum residential density would be approximately
40 units per acre, similar to the density in several new developments in the northern parts of the Planning Area, although on some parcels densities could be higher where a portion of the site is developed with retail. The FEMA- designated SFHAs are mostly designated for Retail and
Business Services; residential uses in that area may not be as feasible in the immediate to mid-term, both due to presence of existing industrial uses and flooding issues.

The eastern portions of the Planning Area would be
developed as new neighborhoods, consistent with the
General Plan and current development proposals with
easy access to stores and services along the mixed-use
Santa Rosa Avenue corridor. Open spaces and trails
along the Todd Creek East Fork will link the mixed-
use district and new and existing neighborhoods. The
new neighborhoods will be served by a street grid that
promotes access to Santa Rosa Avenue, creekway open
spaces and easy circulation within the large sites. Two large new parks are located strategically to maximize
accessibility.

The Moorland neighborhood, a designated DAC and
City-identified Equity Priority Area, will see continued d
evelopment of lower density residential infill, along with medium density residential in a few strategic locations.

Industrial uses are maintained in the southwest part of the Planning
Area, and commercial designations in the
northern and southern portions of Santa Rosa Avenue,
largely consistent with the City’s General Plan.

In addition to access along the creek, bicycle, pedestrian, and
transit improvements would focus on Santa Rosa
Avenue, with a new east-west bicycle and pedestrian
connection
across Highway 101 proposed at Robles
Avenue. While the Robles Avenue connection does not
align with the General Plan crossing recommendation
at Bellevue Avenue, it will provide better connections
between proposed mixed-use and commercial
centers along Santa Ro
sa Avenue and the resi dential
neighborhoods to the west.

Figure 3-1 shows the overall development concept –
where mixed use, residential and industrial districts
will be located as well as proposed connections and
open space concept. Development concepts shown
include mixed use around the central stretch of Santa
Rosa Avenue, industrial uses in the western part of the Planning Area, and residential and park uses in the
eastern part of the Planning Area.

Figure 3-2 shows sites that have development
potential (vacant or underutilized) with their proposed land uses. There are significant opportunities for new
industrial development in the western part of the
Planning Area, mixed use around Santa Rosa
Avenue, residential and park uses in the east and
commercial uses in the south/southeastern part of the
Planning Area.

T
Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
Dauenhauer Park
Newhall
Bike Path
Pearblossom
Trail
Martin
Luther
King Jr. Park
Bayer Park
And Gardens
Southwest
Community
Park
Colgan
Creek Park
Harvest
Park
Bellevue
Ranch Park
Red
Hawk
Park
South
Davis Park
Andy Lopez
Unity Park
Olive Park
Paul &
Gloria
Golis Park
3rd St
El T oro Way
n L t o c i r p A
Oceanic Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Plaza Dr
Santa Rosa Ave
y a W n i b o R
t S n o t w e N
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
t S d n o B
t S C
Cedar Rock Ln
t S Bt S A
e v A e i b s i r F
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
n L e r i u q S
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
e v A a i l o n g a M
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
e v A t t O
Gio Dr
La
EsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
T e
rri
mayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
r D n o i t a c u d E
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
e v A i t t o l i h G
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
n L r e d y n S
e v A s k o o r B
d R t n i o P y n o t S
Stony Point Rd
Stony Point Rd
Santa Rosa Ave
Sa
nta Rosa Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland Ave
Dutton Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn Ave
Hearn Ave
S E
St
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orby Ave
e v A y b r o C
Maple Ave
Aston Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
w o d a e M n o t t u D
W 3Rd St
T odd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Brookwood Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark Dr
Holly Ave
SA
St
West Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
S Moo
rland Ave
Bellevue Ave
r D s s e g r u B
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standi
sh
Ave
r D d w o D
Fairway D
r
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E T odd Rd
Y olanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
Mixed-Use (MX)
Low Residential (L)
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Sphere of Influence
SMART
Medium Residential (M)
Industrial
Park
Proposed Highway 101 Crossing
Improved Existing
Highway 101 Crossing
Commercial Center
General Plan Gateway
Transit Hub
New Connection
T
Mixed use district
centered on Santa
Rosa Avenue
Proposed commercial
center
Bicycle and pedestrian
improvements along
Santa Rosa Avenue
Greenway connec-
tions along existing
creek corridor
Two miles to Rohnert
Park SMART Station
New through streets
to promote walkable
development
Industrial uses maintained
Figure 3-1: Alternative 1 Concept
Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
3rd St
El
Tor
o W
ay
nL tocirpA
Oceanic
Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Santa Rosa Ave
ya
W niboR
tS notweN
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
tS dnoB
tS C
Cedar Rock Ln
tS B
tS A
evA eibsirF
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
nL eriuqS
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
evA ailongaM
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
evA tt
O
Gio Dr
LaEsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
Terrim
ayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
rD noitacudE
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
evA ittolihG
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
nL redynS
evA skoorB
dR tnioP ynotS
Ston
yPoint
Rd
StonyPoint
Rd
Santa
Rosa
Ave
Sa
nta
Rosa
Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland
Ave
Dutton
Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn
Ave
Hearn Ave
SESt
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orbyAve
evA ybroC
Maple Ave
Aston
Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
wodaeM nottuD
W 3Rd St
Todd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Br
ookw
ood
Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark
Dr
Holly Ave
SA
St
W
est
Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan
Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank
Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
SMoo
rlandAve
Bellevue Ave
rD ssegruB
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standish
Ave
rD dwoD
FairwayDr
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E Todd Rd
Yolanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
Low Residential (L)
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Sphere of Influence
SMART
Commercial Center
Transit Hub
New Connection
Medium Residential
High Residential
Retail and Business Services
General Industry
Mixed-Use (MX)
Park
T
T
Figure 3-2: Alternative 1 Land Use
Alternatives Report
14 3.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: CITY-

CENTERED GROWTH
Alternative 2 (Figure 3-3 and 3-4) focuses residential
growth in the northern portion of the Planning Area,
both to the north and south of the Santa Rosa Marketplace shopping center, to create a compact higher density
district, with access to Downtown, existing commercial
centers, and Taylor Mountain Regional Park. This area
is also within City limits and is well served by existing infrastructure and services. This area is also within one of the Equity Priority Areas identified by the General Plan.

This Alternative builds upon the higher-density
residential developments that have been recently
completed in this area and incorporates bicycle and
pedestrian improvements to complement the new
development, including strategic additional streets access points for walking and biking, developed incrementally
as new development is completed. Smaller parks will be
incorporated within the residential districts, and open space along the Kawana Springs Creek will connect
new housing to Taylor Mountain Regional Park. The
FEMA-identified SFHAs have the greatest effect on
this Alternative, posing additional barriers to housing development in the northern portion of the Planning
Area with flood insurance requirements and stricter
building standards.

The east side of the Planning Area will include new
neighborhoods, similar to Alternatives 1 and 3, with
improved trails and open spaces along creeks, along
with a larger community park in the middle and linear
parks extending through neighborhoods connecting to
Todd Creek and a park in the southeast. The overall park acreage is similar to that in Alternative 1.

Improvements in the Moorland area, which is a
designated DAC and City-identified Equity Priority
Area, will include a new mixed-use commercial center
and additional residential areas south of Andy Lopez
Unity Park, where there are development opportunities
and opportunity to bring increased services to the area.

Existing industrial uses are preserved in the southwest portion of the Planning Area, and two sites that the
General Plan designated for residential uses west of the SMART tracks are proposed as industrial, consistent
with the surrounding development and in keeping with
current property owner and development interests. In
the southern portion of South Santa
Rosa Avenue, to
emphasize the industrial nature of existing uses, the
County’s industrial zoning is maintained.

Figure 3-3 shows the overall development concept –
where mixed use, residential and industrial districts will be
located as well as proposed connections and open
spaces concept. Development concepts shown include
a mixed-use
commercial center and more housing in
Moorland, more housing concentrated near Santa Rosa
Marketplace and Downtown Santa Rosa, industrial
uses in the southwestern part of the Planning Area, and additional housing and park uses in the eastern part of the Planning Area.

Figure 3-4 shows sites that
have development potential
(vacant or underutilized) with their proposed land
uses. There are significant opportunities for new
industrial development in the southwestern part of
the Planning Area, a commercial center in Moorland,
more housing concentrated near Downtown Santa
Rosa and in Moorland, and residential and park
uses in the east and commercial uses in the
southeastern part of the Planning Area.

Santa Rosa Marketplace shopping center.

Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
Dauenhauer Park
Newhall
Bike Path
Pearblossom
Trail
Martin
Luther
King Jr. Park
Bayer Park
And Gardens
Southwest
Community
Park
Colgan
Creek Park
Harvest
Park
Bellevue
Ranch Park
Red
Hawk
Park
South
Davis Park
Andy Lopez
Unity Park
Olive Park
Paul &
Gloria
Golis Park
3rd St
El T oro Way
n L t o c i r p A
Oceanic Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Plaza Dr
Santa Rosa Ave
y a W n i b o R
t S n o t w e N
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
t S d n o B
t S C
Cedar Rock Ln
t S Bt S A
e v A e i b s i r F
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
n L e r i u q S
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
e v A a i l o n g a M
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
e v A t t O
Gio Dr
La
EsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
T e
rri
mayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
r D n o i t a c u d E
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
e v A i t t o l i h G
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
e v A s k o o r B
d R t n i o P y n o t S
Stony Point Rd
Stony Point Rd
Santa Rosa Ave
Sa
nta Rosa Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland Ave
Dutton Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn Ave
Hearn Ave
S E
St
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orby Ave
e v A y b r o C
Maple Ave
Aston Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
w o d a e M n o t t u D
W 3Rd St
T odd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Brookwood Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark Dr
H
olly Ave
SA
St
West Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
S Moo
rland Ave
Bellevue Ave
r D s s e g r u B
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standi
sh
Ave
r D d w o D
Fa
irway D
r
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E T odd Rd
Y olanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Sphere of Influence
SMART
High Residential (M/H)
Mixed-Use (MX)
Low Residential (L)
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Medium Residential (M)
Industrial
Park
Proposed Highway 101 Crossing
Improved Existing
Highway 101 Crossing
Commercial Center
General Plan Gateway
New Pedestrian Connection
Retail/Medium Residential (RM)
Transit Hub
New Connection
New through streets
to promote walkable
development
Greenway connections along
existing creek corridor
Proposed commercial
center
Increased residential
density in Moorland
High density residential
near existing infrastructure
and services
Industrial uses maintained
Two miles to Rohnert
Park SMART Station
T
T
Figure 3-3: Alternative 2 Concept
Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
3rd St
El
Tor
o W
ay
nL tocirpA
Oceanic
Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Santa Rosa Ave
ya
W niboR
tS notweN
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
tS dnoB
tS C
Cedar Rock Ln
tS B
tS A
evA eibsirF
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
nL eriuqS
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
evA ailongaM
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
evA tt
O
Gio Dr
LaEsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
Terrim
ayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
rD noitacudE
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
evA ittolihG
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
nL redynS
evA skoorB
dR tnioP ynotS
Ston
yPoint
Rd
StonyPoint
Rd
Santa
Rosa
Ave
Sa
nta
Rosa
Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland
Ave
Dutton
Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn
Ave
Hearn Ave
SESt
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orbyAve
evA ybroC
Maple Ave
Aston
Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
wodaeM nottuD
W 3Rd St
Todd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Br
ookw
ood
Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark
Dr
Holly Ave
SA
St
W
est
Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan
Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank
Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
SMoo
rlandAve
Bellevue Ave
rD ssegruB
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standish
Ave
rD dwoD
FairwayDr
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E Todd Rd
Yolanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
Mixed-Use (MX)
Low Residential (L)
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Sphere of Influence
SMART
Commercial Center
New Connection
New Pedestrian Connection
Park
Medium Residential (M)
High Residential (H)
Retail/Medium Residential (RM)
Retail and Business Services
General Industry
Transit HubT
T
Figure 3-4: Alternative 2 Land Use
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
17 3.3 ALTERNATIVE 3: CENTERS
Alternative 3, shown in Figures 3-5, illustrating the
general concept, and 3-6, indicating where and what type of development may occur, promotes distributed growth
across the Planning Area, with new higher density
development in three “centers” – adjacent to Andy Lopez Unity Park, along Santa Rosa Avenue south of Robles
Avenue, and along Santa Rosa Avenue south of Todd
Road. The centers along Santa Rosa Avenue are part
of mixed-use districts (much smaller in size compared
to Alternative 1). South of the Santa Rosa Marketplace
shopping center, existing residential developments are
complemented by additional medium/high residential
uses and an improved street grid with enhanced
pedestrian connections.

In the east, new Medium/Low Density residential is
introduced north of Taylor Mountain Elementary School
and surrounded by new Low Density residential that is
served by a new street grid. This area will include new neighborhoods as in the other two Alternatives, but with greater amount of open space along Todd Creek as well
as smaller parks connecting to Todd Creek. Alternative
3 has the same overall parkland in the eastern area as in Alternative 1, divided into smaller neighborhood parks.

In the Moorland area, a new smaller neighborhood-
oriented commercial center is proposed across from
Andy Lopez Unity Park along West Robles Avenue. This
commercial center would help to achieve the City’s goals of prioritizing Equity Priority Areas for increased access to services.

Existing industrial uses are preserved in the southwest part of the Planning Area, with the southern stretch along Santa Rosa Avenue designated for Retail and Business
Services, consistent with the City’s General Plan.

Improved trails provide public access along the creek and new local parks are located along the creek east of Elsa Drive and East Crystal Drive.

Figure 3-5 shows the overall development concept –
where mixed use, residential and industrial districts will be located as well as proposed connections and open
spaces concept. Development concepts shown include
multiple commercial centers and retail uses on Santa Rosa Avenue and in Moorland, more housing in Moorland
and concentrated near Santa Rosa Marketplace, indus-
trial uses in the western part of the Planning Area, and housing and park uses in the eastern part of the Planning Area.

Industrial uses in the western portion of the Planning Area.

The Santa Rosa City Limit in the western portion of the Planning Area.

Figure 3-6 shows sites that have development potential
(vacant or underutilized) with their proposed land
uses. There are significant opportunities for new
industrial development in the south/southwestern part
of the Planning Area, multiple commercial centers on
Santa Rosa Avenue and in Moorland, more housing
concentrated near Santa Rosa Marketplace and in
Moorland, and residential and park uses in the east and commercial uses in the southern part of the Planning
Area.

T
Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
Dauenhauer Park
Newhall
Bike Path
Pearblossom
Trail
Martin
Luther
King Jr. Park
Bayer Park
And Gardens
Southwest
Community
Park
Colgan
Creek Park
Harvest
Park
Bellevue
Ranch Park
Red
Hawk
Park
South
Davis Park
Andy Lopez
Unity Park
Olive Park
Paul &
Gloria
Golis Park
3rd St
El
Tor
o W
ay
nL tocirpA
Oceanic
Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Plaza Dr
Santa Rosa Ave
ya
W niboR
tS notweN
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
tS dnoB
tS C
Cedar Rock Ln
tS B
tS A
evA eibsirF
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
nL eriuqS
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
evA ailongaM
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
evA tt
O
Gio Dr
LaEsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
TerrimayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
rD noitacudE
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
evA ittolihG
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
evA skoorB
dR tnioP ynotS
Ston
yPoint
Rd
StonyPoint
Rd
Santa
Rosa
Ave
Sa
nta
Rosa
Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland
Ave
Todd Rd
Dutton
Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn
Ave
Hearn Ave
SESt
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orbyAve
evA ybroC
Maple Ave
Aston
Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
wodaeM nottuD
W 3Rd St
Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Br
ookw
ood
Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark
Dr
H
olly Ave
SA
St
W
est
Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan
Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank
Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
SMoo
rlandAve
Bellevue Ave
rD ssegruB
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standish
Ave
rD dwoD
Fa
irwayDr
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E Todd Rd
Yolanda Ave
Bucks Rd
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
Mixed-Use (MX)
Low Residential (L)
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Sphere of Influence
SMART
Commercial Center
New Connection
New Pedestrian Connection
Park
Medium Residential (M)
High Residential (H)
Retail/Medium Residential (RM)
Retail and Business Services
General Industry
Transit HubT
New through streets
to promote walkable
development
Increased residential
density near Andy
Lopez Unity Park
High density residential
near existing infrastructure
and services
Proposed commercial centers
Industrial uses maintained
Two miles to Rohnert
Park SMART Station
Greenway connec-
tions along existing
creek corridor
Figure 3-5: Alternative 3 Concept
Mile
¯
0 ¼ ½ ¾ 1
3rd St
El
Tor
o W
ay
nL tocirpA
Oceanic
Way
Connie St
Lotus Ct
Santa Rosa Ave
ya
W niboR
tS notweN
2nd St
1st St
Hazelnut Ln
Summercreek Dr
tS dnoB
tS C
Cedar Rock Ln
tS B
tS A
evA eibsirF
Powderhorn Ave
Barham Ave
Gold Dust Way
Redwood Cir
Milicent Way
nL eriuqS
Castro Ct
El Capitan Way
El Portal Dr
Delores Ln
El Centro Way
evA ailongaM
HorizonWay
Thistle Ln
evA tt
O
Gio Dr
LaEsplanadaPl
Mccoy Ave
Barbara Dr
Eddy Dr
N Star Dr
Commercial Ct
Gorel Ct
Terrim
ayLn
Winston Dr
Neville Way
Butterfly Ln
Guinevere Ln
Shady Ln
Meadow Way
Anteeo Way
Cranbrook Way
Bejay Ave
Scenic Ave
Coachman Ln
Nannet Ave
Courtyard Cir
WaysideDr
rD noitacudE
Cresco Ct
Rodeo Ln
El Crystal Dr
FlemingWay
Apple Ln
Pear Ln
evA ittolihG
Connely Ln
Aileen Ave
Ricardo Ave
Ward Rd
nL redynS
evA skoorB
dR tnioP ynotS
Ston
yPoint
Rd
StonyPoint
Rd
Santa
Rosa
Ave
Sa
nta
Rosa
Ave
Sant
aRos
aAve
Moorland
Ave
Dutton
Ave
W HearnAve
Sebastopol Rd
Hearn
Ave
Hearn Ave
SESt
Burt St
W Robles Ave
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma Hill Rd
Petaluma
Hill
Rd
orbyAve
evA ybroC
Maple Ave
Aston
Ave
Bennett Valley Rd
Bennett Valley Rd
wodaeM nottuD
W 3Rd St
Todd Rd Todd Rd
Elsa Dr
Lazzini Ave
Br
ookw
ood
Ave
E Robles Ave
New
mark
Dr
Holly Ave
SA
St
W
est
Ave
Northpoint Pkwy
CourtSt
Colgan
Ave
Giffen Ave
Burbank
Ave
OccidentalRd
Bellevue Ave
SMoo
rlandAve
Bellevue Ave
rD ssegruB
Yuba Dr
Barham Ave
Kawana Springs Rd
Scenic Ave
Mountain View Ave
PearblossomDr
Frazier Ave
Wi
lj
Dutton
Ave
Earle St
Farmers Ln
Millbrae Ave
Standish
Ave
rD dwoD
FairwayDr
Sutton Pl
Ludwig Ave
E Todd Rd
Yolanda Ave
Flower Ave
Horn Ave
Taylor
Mountain
Elementary
School
T
Mixed-Use (MX)
Low Residential (L)
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan Area
Santa Rosa City Limit
Medium/Low Residential (M/L)
Sphere of Influence
SMART
Commercial Center
New Connection
New Pedestrian Connection
Park
Medium Residential (M)
High Residential (H)
Retail/Medium Residential (RM)
Retail and Business Services
General Industry
Transit HubT
Figure 3-6: Alternative 3 Land Use
Alternatives Report
20 3.4 COMP ARISON OF

ALTERNATIVES
Each Alternative adds over 5,000 residential units to the just over 4,000 housing units that currently exist in the Planning Area. The amount of building area devoted to
non-residential uses—principally Retail and Business
Services and General Industrial—is significantly less
than the existing amount of development.

Table 3-1 provides an overview of the expected amount
of new development resulting from application of land
use designations as presented in the Alternatives to sites that are vacant and underutilized, and Table 3-2 shows
the assumed density ranges for the proposed land uses—
these are common across all three Alternatives. Figures 3-7 and 3-8 illustrate the projected total square footage of Retail, Industrial, and Mixed-Use development, as well as the total projected residential units, for each Alternative.

The number of housing units resulting from the three
Alternatives is somewhat similar, with major differences arising from the location of density. In Alternative 1, residential development, along with Retail and Business Services, is located along Santa Rosa Avenue, taking
advantage of the existing main commercial spine in the
Planning Area. In Alternative 2, residential density is largely located in the north of the Planning Area, benefiting from the proximity to existing City services and infrastructure and proximity to downtown. In Alternative 3, residential density is spread throughout the Planning Area with
some density in the north as in Alternative 2, and some density along Santa Rosa Avenue as in Alternative 1, and additional pockets of residential density in the Moorland neighborhood and in the eastern part of the Planning Area adjacent to proposed mixed-use centers.

Existing Net New
Area Description Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Total non-residential (sf ) 5,889,900 1,322,500 426,400 1,635,700 Retail and Business Services (sf) 2,485,600 1,322,500 426,400 1,092,000 Industrial (sf) 3,404,300 1,500,100 2,629,700 1,635,700 Mixed-Use (sf) 0 421,600 65,800 181,200
Total residential (units) 4,000 5,500 5,700 6,000
Low 500 1,800 1,600 1,700
Medium/Low 300 500 400 900
Medium 1,800 700 1,300 400
High 0 200 2,200 2,200
Mixed-Use 0 2,300 300 900
Note: Institutional/Public/Misc square -footage and the number of Medium/High and Mobile Home Park Residential units do not change from the existing conditions.

Land Use Residential (du/acre
Maximum)
Non-residential (FAR
Maximum/Range)
Low Density Residential 8
Medium/Low Density Residential 13
Medium Density Residential 18
Medium/High Density Residential 30
High Density Residential 40
Retail/Medium Density Residential 18 0.15
Mixed-Use 40 0.25
Retail and Business Services 0.25 – 2.0
General Industry 1.0
Table 3-1: Proposed Alternative Buildout Estimates
Table 3-2: Proposed Density Ranges
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
21 Notes:

1. Existing c
onditions are shown with a dotted line.

2. T
he bars in this graph represent the total projected buildout (existing and net new buildout).

Notes:

1. Existing c
onditions are shown with a dotted line.

2. T
he bars in this graph represent the total projected buildout (existing and net new buildout).

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Retail Industrial
Category Mixed Use
0 1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
Square Feet
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Low Medium/Low Medium
Residential Types High Mixed Use
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
Retail Units (in thousands)
Figure 3-7: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Non-Residential Uses Figure 3-8: Comparison of Alternatives, Total Projected Residential Uses Alternatives Report
22 Each of the Alternatives includes a new east-west
connection over Highway 101, with Alternative 1
proposing a new location at West Robles Avenue, and
Alternatives 2 and 3 proposing the connection at Bellevue in alignment with the General Plan. As discussed above, the Robles Avenue location would allow for greater
connections between the Moorland neighborhood and
pro-posed new commercial centers east of Highway 101.

All Alternatives also have greenway connections along the existing creek corridor in the eastern part of the Planning Area. Each Alternative proposes additional through-
streets in areas with new development projected. While
all three Alternatives will see bike, pedestrian, and transit improvements along Santa Rosa Avenue, additional
improvements are proposed in Alternative 1 to support
the proposed mixed-use corridor. Transit service does
not change in any Alternative; however, Alternative 3 has more through streets to promote connection near the
Transit Hub.

Each Alternative proposes additional commercial centers, with the locations dependent upon proposed residential
density. Alternative 1 also includes commercial land
uses east of Highway 101 in the southern portion of the Planning Area, in alignment with the City’s General
Plan. Alternatives 2 and 3 include industrial land uses throughout the southern portion of the Planning Area,
in alignment with the Sonoma County General Plan.

Alternative 2 has considerably lower Retail and Business Services and Mixed-Use square footage than Alternatives 1 and 3. In general, Alternatives 1 and 3 have more
commercial square footage throughout the Planning Area
than Alternative 2. Alternative 1 concentrates this into one additional mixed-use commercial center, while Alternative 3 spreads this out into three additional mixed-use centers.

Industrial uses are maintained in the western part of the Planning Area throughout all Alternatives, but Industrial use square footage is considerably higher in Alternative 2.

New housing development in the Planning Area.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
23 4 TRANSPORTATION

IMPLICATIONS

4.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
(VMT)
A common indicator used to quantify the amount of
motor vehicle use is Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT,
which represents the total number of miles driven per
day by persons traveling to and from a defined area. VMT is also a key metric used in environmental analyses. The major components influencing VMT include the average
distance residents drive to work, school, and shop-ping; the distances that employees drive when commuting
from home; the diversity of land use patterns including jobs/housing balance; the interconnectedness of the
circulation network; and the proportion of trips that are made by non-automobile modes. Custom runs of the
Sonoma County Transportation and Climate Authorities
(SCTCA) travel demand model were performed to
estimate the VMT characteristics associated with each of the three SSRSP land use Alternatives in consideration
of land use types, locations, and quantities as well as the Note: Existing conditions are shown with a dotted line.

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Residential VMT/Capita Employment VMT/Worker Total VMT/Service Population 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
Daily Miles 13.6 13.8 13.5

10.3 8.4

9.7 31.6

26.8 29.6
Figure 4-1: Comparison of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Characteristics major transportation facilities that would be present.

VMT can be expressed in several ways. For residential
uses, VMT is typically measured as VMT per capita, or
the average number of daily miles driven per resident.

Employment uses are typically measured by focusing on
employee travel, estimating the daily commute-based
miles driven per employee. Total VMT can also be useful when considering the differences in auto travel levels be- tween Alternatives; it is often expressed as a “Total VMT per Service Population” performance metric that reflects the total miles driven for all land uses and trip types divided by the sum of residents and employees.

The analyzed VMT performance metrics are shown
in Figure 4-1. Results are shown for each of the three
Alternatives, as well as existing metrics for the overall County of Sonoma and City of Santa Rosa.

Alternatives Report
24 4.2 RESIDENTIAL VMT
Based on output from the SCTCA model, the three
Alternatives are projected to perform similarly to one
another with respect to the amount of VMT generated
by residents. All three Alternatives would perform
better than the overall County average VMT per capita,
affirming the transportation efficiency of focusing
residential growth in the County’s urbanized areas,
and all three would perform similarly to current City
of Santa Rosa averages. Alternative 3 is projected to
result in the fewest residential vehicle miles traveled on a per-capita basis, with Alternative 1 generating slightly more and Alternative 2 generating the most. It is likely that the slightly better performance with Alternative 3 is at least partially attributable to its “centers” focus that concentrates new residential uses around existing and
proposed commercial centers. It is important to note,
however, that the model may not be sensitive enough to
account for other VMT-benefiting aspects, such as the
potential for higher usage of alternative transportation methods with the “corridors” emphasis along Santa
Rosa Avenue in Alternative 1, or the beneficial effects of strategically located high-density residential
development reflected in Alternative 2. At a broad
perspective, all three Alternatives include components
that would positively benefit residential VMT, and for the purposes of com-paring alternatives, may be considered
to perform similarly.

4.3 EMPLOYMENT VMT
With respect to commute-based VMT generated by
workers in the Specific Plan area, Alternative 2 would
generate the fewest vehicle miles per employee while
Alternative 1 would generate the most. The employment
VMT metrics in Alternative 2 may benefit from focusing
residential growth in the northern Plan area near
existing employment uses as well as adding medium
density residential development nearer industrial uses in the southwestern Plan area, both of which help to reduce the commute distances for at least some people who both work and live in the same vicinity. In contrast, Alternative 1 disperses employment growth along the Santa Rosa
Avenue corridor, which may benefit those who live and
work in those same mixed-use areas, but has less of an
effect on existing employees in the northern Plan area
and those working in the southwestern industrial areas.

Alternative 3 concentrates growth in centers, functioning as a hybrid of the other two alternatives from an
employment VMT perspective. Alternatives 2 and 3 may
also benefit somewhat from the new Bellevue Avenue
overcrossing of Highway 101, which is included in the
City’s General Plan and creates a more direct driving
route and slightly shorter commute distances between
the east and west sides of the freeway than the Robles
Avenue overcrossing included in Alternative 1.

4.4 TOTAL VMT PER SERVICE

POPULATION
VMT per Service Population is based on total VMT,
which includes all types of vehicular travel including
commute, school, shopping/errands, visitor-serving, and recreation. The alternatives modeling results for VMT
per Service Population show that all three Alternatives would generate higher per-person VMT levels than the
current Citywide average, with Alternative 1 generating the most and Alternative 2 generating the least. The total VMT per service population metric tends to perform
best in central areas such as downtown Santa Rosa
where there is a concentration of diverse uses along with more extensive facilities for other travel modes (transit, walking, and biking). The “city-centered growth” concept emphasized in Alternative 2 likely benefits from this
given its emphasis on growth in the Plan areas closest to downtown. In contrast, Alternative 1 disperses mixed-
use growth with an emphasis on the Santa Rosa Avenue
corridor, including areas that are somewhat distant from downtown. While this concentrated mix of residential
and employment uses near transit should have a
beneficial effect on VMT, the modeling output suggests
that these benefits may be diluted by the distances
between some of the Plan’s concentrated growth areas
(especially in the southern Plan area) and the City’s other major activity areas, including downtown. As previously noted, the model may also not be sensitive enough to
fully account for the beneficial effects of prioritizing development along transit corridors and implementing
improvements to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

Finally, with respect to Alternative 3, performance falls in between the other two alternatives, which is reflective of the hybrid approach used in emphasizing growth in
several centers.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
25 4.5 ROADWAY CONGESTION
LEVELS
Traffic operation on roadway segments is influenced
by many factors including the type of street, number
of lanes, speed limits, presence of turn lanes, spacing of traffic controls such as signals, and most importantly, traffic volumes. For the Alternatives analysis, comparative high-level congestion estimates for future conditions
(approximately the year 2050) were obtained using the
peak hour traffic volumes and roadway capacity estimates produced by the SCTCA model. The model includes
output for both the weekday morning and evening peak
hours; for the purposes of this assessment the most
congested of these two peaks was mapped for the study
area’s major roadway segments. It is important to note
that the SCTCA model includes only major roadways;
in other words, all traffic is “loaded” onto major streets rather than local streets or collectors.

With continued growth in the region in addition to the
growth associated with each of the three alternatives,
several major roadways in the study area are projected
to approach or exceed their capacities during the busiest peak hours of the day, indicating that traffic congestion is likely to occur. The roadways shown by the modeling to
potentially be most affected by congestion in the future include:
• US 101
• Santa Rosa Avenue - Y olanda to Bellevue
• Santa Rosa Avenue - Todd to Mountain View
• Santa Rosa Avenue – South of Mountain View
• Baker Avenue Interchange
• Hearn Avenue Interchange
• Petaluma Hill Road –Y olanda to Winterhaven
• Corby Avenue – just south of Hearn
• Bellevue Avenue
• Todd Road Interchange
The relative congestion levels are similar across all three alternatives, though there are subtle differences in the level of congestion on some street segments. Figures
4-2 through 4-4 show color-coded representations of
congestion levels on study area roadways for each of the Alternatives.

Roadway congestion during peak hours is a common
occurrence in urbanized areas and has increasingly been considered by jurisdictions, including Santa Rosa, to be an acceptable tradeoff in transit-accessible, pedestrian- oriented areas. Roadway widening exceeding two lanes
in each direction also has the potential to cause adverse secondary impacts on non-auto modes and may en-
tail excessive construction and long-term maintenance
costs, so should generally be avoided. In considering
these factors in tandem with the congestion modeling
results summarized in Figure 4-1, there may still be
several roadway segments in the Specific Plan area where additional road-way capacity, such as widening from one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction, is warranted. These include the following.
• Baker Avenue Interchange – may require an
additional westbound lane on the overpass for all
Alternatives, consistent with the City’s General
Plan.
• Santa Rosa Avenue between Todd Road and
Mountain View Avenue - may require an
additional lane in each direction with Alternatives
1 and 3, consistent with the Sonoma County
General Plan.
• Petaluma Hill Road between Y olanda Avenue and
Winterhaven Avenue – may require an additional
lane in each direction for all Alternatives.
• Todd Road Interchange – may require overpass
widening for all Alternatives, consistent with the
Sonoma County General Plan.

It should be noted that Alternative 1 has an overcrossing at Robles Avenue, while Alternatives 2 and 3 have an
overcrossing at Bellevue Avenue. Alternative 1 better
connects the Moorland neighborhood and Andy Lopez
Unity Park to a future commercial center and the Santa
Rosa Avenue corridor. The Bellevue Avenue overcrossing
in Alternatives 2 and 3 was originally identified by the General Plan, is a larger road, and is within the City
limits.

Figure 4-2: Alternative 1 Projected Congestion Levels
Figure 4-3: Alternative 2 Projected Congestion Levels
Figure 4-4: Alternative 3 Projected Congestion Levels
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
29 4.6 WALKING, BIKING, AND

TRANSIT
Output from the SCTCA travel demand model indicates
that the three Alternatives would perform similarly with respect to influencing transit and bicycle/pedestrian
mode share. Alternatives 2 and 3 are projected to have
a slightly better influence on walk/bike mode share
than Alternative 1, though the difference is negligible.

Importantly, while major facilities such as SMART and
regional pathways are coded into the SCTCA travel
demand model, local transit routes, non-regional
pathways, and on-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not. Further, the model accounts for synergies among land uses at a broad level, though is not sensitive to
block- or site-level travel efficiencies (like short walking and biking trips) such as those occurring at, for example, mixed-use developments along transit corridors. For
these reasons, each Alternative’s overall effects on
walking, biking, and transit are addressed in a more
qualitative manner. Following is a discussion of how each Alternative could influence non-auto modes.

ALTERNATIVE 1
This Alternative focuses growth in a higher-density,
pedestrian-oriented mixed-use configuration along
Santa Rosa Avenue, accompanied by improvements to
pedestrian and bicycle facilities on the corridor. The new mixed-use district segment of Santa Rosa Avenue, which
runs from just north of Elsa Drive to just south of Todd Road, has already been designated by the City and County Active Transportation Plans (ATPs) to include separated bikeways. Further, extended bus service with 15-minute
frequencies is included in Santa Rosa CityBus’s Short
Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The focused growth in areas
that are planned to have robust non-auto mode choices
would reduce reliance on travel by automobile, in turn
reducing the amount of vehicle trips and VMT generated
per person.

In the eastern portion of the Plan area, land uses in
currently vacant areas would be predominantly lower-
density residential, with pedestrian and bicycle travel focused on greenways as well as existing and new streets extending to the Santa Rosa Avenue corridor. While
these areas would have good non-auto connectivity
for travel to nearby uses such as schools and parks and would include connections to mixed-use areas and bus
service on Santa Rosa Avenue, they would remain some-
what auto-dependent.

To the west of US 101, Alternative 1 would generally
retain existing lower-density residential areas as well as existing areas that are designated for industrial-
type uses. A new pedestrian and bicycle connection
would be established over US 101 at Robles Avenue,
improving east-west connectivity and linking west-side
uses around Andy Lopez Unity Park to a proposed east
side commercial center along Santa Rosa Avenue. This
area would also be supported by extended bus service
to Moorland Ave from both Sebastopol Road and Santa
Rosa Avenue via Todd Road as called for in Santa Rosa
CityBus Short Range Transit Plan).

ALTERNATIVE 2
Alternative 2 includes medium-high density residential
growth through redevelopment opportunities in the
northern Planning Area between Highway 12 and
Buck Street, mostly along the east side of Santa Rosa
Avenue. This area already has substantial infrastructure and services including retail. Santa Rosa Avenue is also planned to have separated bikeways and increased transit service. With planned bike network upgrades, the area
would be readily bikeable to major employment areas in
downtown Santa Rosa, which is only one to two miles
away. The presence of existing major retail uses within a walkable distance would also reduce auto-reliance and be supportive of fewer trips and lower per-person VMT
levels.

Land uses in the eastern portion of the Planning Area
would be lower-density residential, similar to Alternative

1. Pedestrian and bicycle travel would be focused on
greenways and a new grid-type network of streets. As
in Alternative 1, this area would remain somewhat auto
dependent.

To the west of US 101, Alternative 1 would generally
retain existing lower-density residential areas as well as existing areas that are designated for industrial-
type uses. A new pedestrian and bicycle connection
would be established over US 101 at Robles Avenue,
improving east-west connectivity and linking west-side
uses around Andy Lopez Unity Park to a proposed east
side commercial center along Santa Rosa Avenue. This
area would also be supported by extended bus service
to Moorland Ave from both Sebastopol Road and Santa
Rosa Avenue via Todd Road as called for in Santa Rosa
CityBus’s Short Range Transit Plan.

Alternatives Report
30 ALTERNATIVE 3
This Alternative includes several small- to mid-sized areas of higher density in different parts of the Planning Area.

The largest concentration of high-density residential
growth would be between Kawana Springs Road and
Burt Street, which like the larger high-density area in Alternative 2, has existing infrastructure and nearby
services as well as proximity to planned improvements to bike and transit facilities on Santa Rosa Avenue. With the addition of several proposed internal streets with smaller block sizes, this area has the potential to support many trips by non-auto modes.

An additional area characterized by medium- to
medium/high-density residential and mixed uses,
along with two new commercial centers, would be in
the southern Planning Area along the east side of Santa Rosa Avenue between East Robles Avenue and Hunter
Creek. In addition to improved walking, biking, and
transit facilities along Santa Rosa Avenue, the east sides of these new activity areas would have direct access to pathways along a north-south greenway. The mix of
uses and denser development pattern in this area would
encourage and support non-auto travel. The activity area would also be supportive of the frequent transit service planned by CityBus on Santa Rosa Avenue and Todd
Road. The “centers” created in this Alternative would
also be optimal locations for mobility hubs, which could further strengthen the connections among walking,
biking, and transit.

The eastern portion of the Plan area would be lower-
density residential similar to Alternatives 1 and 2, with pedestrian and bicycle travel oriented to greenways and a new grid-based street network. The area would support internal non-auto travel, though travel to the broader
area would likely remain somewhat auto-dependent.

Alternative 3 would add a small commercial center and
small area of medium-density residential uses near Andy Lopez Unity Park but would otherwise generally retain
existing low-density residential and industrial uses. As such the area would be expected to remain fairly auto-
dependent. Like Alternative 2 and consistent with the
General Plan, the planned multimodal crossing of US
101 would be located at Bellevue Avenue.

The key points for the three Alternatives are summarized in Table 4-1.

Bicycle infrastructure in the Moorland neighborhood.

South Santa Rosa Specific Plan
31 All Alternatives Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Walking and Bicycling
Planned separated bikeways
along the Santa Rosa
Avenue corridor between
Highway 12 and T odd Road
will support and encourage
bicycle travel.

Walking and biking in the
lower-density eastern Plan
area would be focused
on greenways as well as
existing and new streets.

While these areas would
have good non-auto
connectivity for travel
to nearby uses including
schools and parks, they
would remain somewhat
auto-dependent.

Mixed-use intensification
along the Santa Rosa Avenue
corridor would be accompa-
nied by enhanced pedestrian
and bicycle facilities, creat-
ing an extended pedestri-
an-oriented district that is
supportive of shorter trips
being made by walking and
bicycling.

A new pedestrian and bicycle
connection over US 101 at
Robles Avenue would im-
prove east-west connectivity
between western areas and
a commercial center along
Santa Rosa Avenue.

Focused growth in northern
Plan area would be readily
bikeable to major downtown
employment and activity
areas as well as SMART and
is within walking and biking
distance of existing Retail and
Business Services uses.

Focused residential and com-
mercial growth in Moorland
would support neighborhood
walking and biking trips.

Bellevue Avenue overcross-
ing of US 101 would form
continuous east-west bicycle
linkage including to Elsie Allen
High School.
“Centers” growth pattern
has potential to capture many
shorter local trips by walking
and biking.

New growth centers in
southern Plan area could
directly access a major north-
south greenway, supporting
walking and especially biking
trips.

A small commercial center
and area of medium density
retail in Moorland would
support local walking and
biking trips.

Bellevue Avenue crossing of
US 101 forms a strong east-
west bicycle linkage.

Transit
Planned 15-minute bus
frequencies on Santa
Rosa Avenue between
Highway 12 and T odd Road
including, route extension
to Moorland Avenue, as
establishment of a transit
hub and transit service
across Highway 101 on
Hearn Avenue will support
and encourage travel by
transit.

Concentration of mixed-use
growth along Santa Rosa Av-
enue would take the greatest
benefit of increased transit
frequencies.

Higher density residential in
northern area would be very
transit supportive; remainder
of Plan area would be less so.

Growth “centers” would sup-
port transit and are potential
locations for mobility hubs
to strengthen walking, biking,
and transit connections.

Table 4-1: Summary of Non-Auto Mode Characteristics
Alternatives Report
32 5 NEXT STEPS

5.1 COMMUNITY OUTREACH
One of the most important next steps in the process will be gathering community input on the three Alternatives
presented in this report. Insights from the community
will help inform the development of the Preferred
Alternative through assessments of the different
aspects of each Alternative presented here. A
community workshop, Engagement Advisory
Committee (CAC) meeting, and a Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) meeting will be held to gather
input from community and provide an opportunity
for
brainstorming on a Preferred Alternati ve.

5.2 SPECIFIC PLAN

DEVELOPMENT
The feedback generated from the community engagement
that follows this report will inform the development of a Draft Preferred Alternative, which will describe the
preferred land use and circulation for the future of South Santa Rosa. This outcome could be a clear preference
for one Alternative or a hybrid concept that combines
components of each. The Draft Preferred Alternative
will go back out to community for further input, and will then be refined to create a final Preferred Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative will be presented to decision- makers at the Planning Commission and City Council
for approval.

Following approval of the Preferred Alternative, the
planning team will draft the full Specific Plan and the supporting Environmental Impact Report, which will be
presented to the Planning Commission and City Council
for adoption.

The Bellevue Union School District office.