CITY OF SEBASTOPOL CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM REPORT FOR MEETING OF: November 5, 2024
=========================================================================================== To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: John Jay, Associate Planner
Subject: 7621 Healdsburg Ave - Approval of Use Permit and Major Tentative Map =========================================================================================== RECOMMENDATIONS:
Adopt a resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit for 100% residential within the Commercial Office District and approve a Major Tentative Map.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The project proposes to construct seven 1120 square foot and five 1148 square foot townhomes each with 1 car garage. Additionally, there will be 1 car parking space per unit on site along the rear of the site with entrance from Murphy Avenue. The project also includes one apartment building with six 760 square foot and six 590 square foot one bedroom apartment units. The apartment units would be accessible from Healdsburg Avenue with 18 parking spaces in the rear of the building along with an ADA elevator access on the western side of the building. The project site is approximately 1.44 acres and is currently vacant and is surrounded by a mix of commercial and residential uses.
The project entitlements include a conditional use permit for 100% residential within a Commercial Office district and tentative map to subdivide one parcel into 12 Townhome lots and one lot that includes one apartment building with 12 apartments, parking lot, and common space.
As the project includes the subdivision of land, the City Council is the final review authority of the Conditional Use Permit and Major Tentative Map. The design review and tree permits will be reviewed after the City Council decision by the Design Review/Tree Board.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The proposed project intends to increase the housing stock within the City of Sebastopol by developing a currently vacant site into 24 residential housing units that mix attached townhomes and apartments. The project would also achieve a list of General Plan goals as noted in the staff report, as well as helping Sebastopol reach its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals for the next cycle. As stated in the project description, if approved the applicant proposes to construct seven 1120 square foot and five 1148 square foot townhomes each with 1 car garage. Additionally there will be 1 car parking space per unit on site along the rear of the site with entrance from Murphy Avenue. The project also includes one apartment building with six 760 square foot and six 590 square foot one bedroom apartment units. The apartment units would be accessible from Healdsburg Avenue with 18 parking spaces in the rear of the building along with an ADA elevator access on the western side of the building.
The project also includes the removal of onsite trees. As part of the applicant’s documents, there is an Arborist report noting there are 59 trees of which 29 are proposed to be removed, 18 can be retained with moderate or less impact, 7 trees can be retained with a significant impact, and 5 fruit trees to be removed without requiring mitigation. Considering the proximity of construction activities, type of activities, tree species, and tree condition - the following ratings are used to estimate the amount of impact on tree health and stability. Most trees will tolerate a (1) rating, many trees could tolerate a (2) rating with careful consideration and mitigation, but trees with a (3) Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
rating are poor candidates for preservation due to their very close proximity to construction or because they are located within the footprint of construction and cannot be preserved. • (3) A significant impact on long term tree integrity can be expected as a result of proposed development. • (2) A moderate impact on long term tree integrity can be expected ds a result of proposed development. • (1) A minor impact on long term tree integrity can be expected as a result of proposed development. • (0) No impact expected if protected per recommendations.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Through the City’s preapplication conference, the applicant met with the various City departments to go over the very early stages of the proposal, which included a site plan which showed an internal connection through the site with ingress and egress onto Murphy and Healdsburg Avenue. After that meeting with city staff, modifications were made to the site vehicle access.
The revised site plan is instead configured to have an entrance from Healdsburg to the apartment units with parking behind this structure. This site access no longer connects to the upper units/Murphy Avenue. The entrance from Murphy Avenue serves the townhomes on the southern portion of the site, it then dead ends on the eastern portion of the site where the trash enclosure will be located and where emergency vehicles would have to back up and turn around. This iteration of the project was then presented to the Planning Commission as well as the Design Review Board under a preliminary review and these two groups provided much guided feedback. The project submitted for their review was 15 townhome units at the rear of the property and a mixed use building along the frontage of Healdsburg which was comprised of ground floor commercial, and 2 nd floor
residential, both the Design Review Board and Planning Commission encouraged the applicant to develop a project that was 100% residential.
Lastly, as the project was revised, a request of the Planning Director was to move the Healdsburg driveway to the western side of the site, which was done by the applicant. The project was subject to a traffic study and the study conditions require the driveway to be relocated back to the eastern side of the site. The applicant has made his change as part of the required conditions of that study and is part of the attached Tentative Map.
Site analysis
There are constraints to the site itself as it is heavily wooded as well as having steep slopes. As you analyze the site and move away from Healdsburg Avenue, the topography starts to climb up the hill towards Murphy Ave and with that requires an immense amount of grading work to be done. The applicant has provided a grading plan with earthwork quantities within the application.
The Healdsburg/ Murphy intersection is also one of the intersections identified in the General Plan as needing to be upgraded to either a traffic signal or potential roundabout. As this is a CalTrans right-of-way, future developments will need to include intersection analysis to determine when and if a signal is warranted. As the current proposal has two forms of entrance and exiting the site, traffic on and off the site was studied as part of the project and included in the report. A component of the review for this project was the traffic configuration which required both site and intersection-specific traffic analysis to ensure appropriate safety and queuing of vehicles. This review, along with the consideration for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption for in-fill development, were two of the guiding reasons why the traffic study was warranted. The traffic study conducted determined that the project will meet the applicable significance thresholds for vehicle miles traveled Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
and has a recommendation to have the driveway on Healdsburg Ave placed on the eastern side of the site and no traffic signal has been required.
Housing
As the project provides more than 5 units of residential housing on the site, it is subject to the city’s inclusionary housing requirements. Set forth in Section 17.250.050 the percentage requirement is as follows
1. Fifteen percent of the units shall be inclusionary units affordable to households earning 120 percent or less of AMI; or (3.6 units)
2. Ten percent of the units shall be inclusionary units affordable to households earning 80 percent or less of AMI; or (2.4 units)
3. Five percent of the units shall be inclusionary units affordable to households earning 50 percent or less of AMI. (1.2 units)
Currently the applicant has not determined what inclusionary unit rates they would be using or where those units would be located on the site. Staff is recommending a condition of approval that prior to final map recordation, the applicant include the inclusionary percentage along with location of said units on the final map and those inclusionary requirements would be subject to the current requirements at time of recordation.
General Plan Consistency:
This project is consistent with the following General Plan policies as shown below. • Goal LU1 - Maintain Sebastopol as a unique, charming, and environmentally sensitive small town that provides residents, businesses, and visitors with opportunities to enjoy a high quality of life. • Policy LU 1-2: Avoid urban sprawl by concentrating development within the City limits; favor infill development over annexation.
• Policy LU 5-5: Strongly encourage residential development in a balanced and efficient pattern that reduces sprawl, preserves open space, and creates convenient connections to other land uses. • Policy LU 6-1: Promote increased residential densities. • Policy LU 6-2: Promote compact urban form that provides residential opportunities in close proximity to jobs, services, and transit.
• Policy LU 7-1: Maintain an inventory of developable and appropriately zoned office, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use land sufficient to attract and provide regional services. • Policy LU 7-6: Encourage mixed-use developments throughout the city. • Policy LU 7-7: In mixed use, commercial, office, and other non-residential developments, encourage non-residential uses on the ground floor while allowing residential uses on the ground floor where appropriate.
• Housing Element Policy C-4: The City will encourage development of new housing to meet a range of income levels, including market-rate housing, and a variety of housing sizes and types. • Housing Element Goal D-1: Promote Housing Affordability for both Renters and Homeowners Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
The project site has two zoning districts located within the property. The Office Commercial (CO) district fronts Healdsburg Avenue and the rear, southern part of the parcel with access to Murphy Avenue is zoned Multi-family Residential (R7). The project intends to develop the Commercially zoned part of the project with twelve one bedroom apartment units. However, 100% residential projects within a Commercial Zoning district that are not affordable housing require a conditional use permit to be approved. The Planning Commission considered the Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
conditional use permit at their August 27, 2024 meeting, where they provided a recommendation of approval to the City Council. The second/southern half of the parcel that is zoned Multi-Family Residential (R7) and is subject to the R7 development standards as well as the small lot subdivisions standards set forth in Chapter 17.230 of the Sebastopol Municipal Code.
Environmental Review: The project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as an infill project. The project is on site that is 1.26 acres in size, surrounded by urban uses. In order to qualify for the infill exemption, the project must also meet each of the following criteria:
1. Be consistent with the applicable general plan and zoning designation, as well as all applicable general plan policies and zoning regulations.
2. The project site must not have value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
3. The project must not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
4. The site must be able to be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The project satisfies all of these criteria. As described above, a traffic study was completed showing that the project would not have a significant effect on traffic. A copy of the traffic study is included as an exhibit.
Required Findings, which are made and attached as Resolution Findings of Approval The required findings of the project for a Major Subdivision (5 or more parcels), are subject to the State Subdivision Map Act and the findings in SMC Section 16.28.070 and 17.230.090 as follows:
A. In recommending approval or conditional approval or in approving or conditionally approving a tentative map, the Planning Commission or City Council as applicable shall find:
1. That the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and other applicable provisions of this code; and
2. Except for condominium conversion projects where no new structures are added, that the design of the proposed subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, as described in the State Subdivision Map Act and any guidelines promulgated by the City Council.
B. In making recommendations or in disapproving, or in approving at a lower density a housing development which is in compliance with the applicable plans, zoning and development policies in effect at the time the project’s application was determined to be complete, the Planning Commission or City Council, as applicable shall make written findings based upon substantial evidence in the record that both of the following conditions exist:
1. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density.
2. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified other than disapproval of the housing development project or approval upon condition that the project be developed at a lower density.
C. (not appliable to this development)
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
D. The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may deny, approval of the tentative map on any grounds provided by law including, without limitation, a finding that the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would result in, or add to, violation of existing requirements prescribed by a State regional water quality control board. A tentative map shall be denied if any of the following findings are made:
1. That the proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan, applicable specific plans, or other applicable provisions of this code;
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the General Plan, applicable specific plans, or other applicable provisions of this code;
3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development;
4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development;
5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Council may approve such a tentative map if an environmental impact report was prepared with respect to the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report;
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems;
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgment, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the City Council may approve a map if they find that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that those will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, and no authority is hereby granted to the Planning Commission to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision;
8. That all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the rules and procedures adopted by the City Council pursuant thereto have not been met;
9. That the applicant has failed to submit complete or adequate information;
10. Subject to Section 66474.4 of the State Subdivision Map Act, that the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (commencing with Section 51200 of the Government Code) and that the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would be too small to sustain their agricultural use.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Section 17.230.090 - Findings for approval of small lot subdivisions.
Small lot subdivisions conforming to these provisions shall only be approved if the following findings can be made in an affirmative manner:
A. The subject property is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; B. The proposed development would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located; C. The proposed development, including the density, site design, and design of units, is compatible with the existing neighborhood and nearby uses;
D. Approval of the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or general welfare; and
E. Approval of the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan.
Section 17.415.030 – Findings for a conditional use permit A. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable provisions of this title.
B. The establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case (location, size, design, and operating characteristics), be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area of such use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
This item has been noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting date.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The city anticipates generating revenue through building permit fees and development impact fees, which are designed to offset the city's expenditures incurred during the planning and development stages. Additionally, we expect an increase in tax revenue and associated expenses once these units become occupied.
OPTIONS:
• Approve the proposed resolution as attached in the staff report • Direct staff to make reasons for denial and schedule a meeting at a date certain
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 24-xx Findings of Approval
Exhibit A – Tentative Map
Exhibit B – Conditions of Approval
Exhibit C – Standard Conditions of Approval
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Exhibit D – Traffic Study
Application Materials
Planning Commission Resolution 24-06 with recommendations to City Council Staff presentation
Applicant presentation
APPROVALS:
Department Head Approval: Approval Date: ____10/23/24_____ CEQA Determination (Planning): Approval Date: ____10/23/24____ The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15332 In-fill Development Projects
Administrative Services (Financial) Approval Date: ______10/30/24______ Costs authorized in City Approved Budget: ☐ Yes ☐ No N/A Account Code (f applicable) ___________________________ City Attorney Approval: Approval Date: ____10/30/24_____ City Manager Approval: Approval Date: _____10/29/24____ Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-2024
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL APPROVING A USE PERMIT AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY AT 7621 HEALDSBURG AVE (APN 004- 291-019)
WHEREAS, the City of Sebastopol completed a comprehensive General Plan update with adoption of a new General Plan on November 15, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City of Sebastopol completed a Housing Element Update to the General Plan with adoption of a new Housing Element on January 3, 2023, and Certified by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on March 7, 2023; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, codified at Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR, § 15000 et seq.), on November 15, 2016, the City Council certified and adopted an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sebastopol General Plan (the “Project”; State Clearinghouse No. 2016032001); and
WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit for residential development in a Commercial Office district and a Tentative Map for an 12-Unit townhome project and 12 unit apartment building known as Pacific Knolls (the “Project”), was filed on May 8, 2024, by Kathy Austin / Pacific Knolls LLC, which consists of subdividing one vacant parcels into 12 townhome lots and one parcel to include; to be developed with 12 townhome units, landscaped areas, and parking. Parking will be provided via a surface parking lot on site as well as garage parking for all of the units; and
WHEREAS, the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan, in that it conforms to the following goals and policies:
• Goal LU1 - Maintain Sebastopol as a unique, charming, and environmentally sensitive small town that provides residents, businesses, and visitors with opportunities to enjoy a high quality of life, in that the project will provide housing opportunities that are environmentally friendly with the low water landscape, and improvements to existing pedestrian facilities.
• Policy LU 1-2: Avoid urban sprawl by concentrating development within the City limits; favor infill development over annexation, in that the project is an infill development as it intends to develop a vacant parcel within city limits.
• Policy LU 1-7: Encourage new development to be contiguous to existing development, whenever possible, in that the project reflects similar characteristics to the existing development of the building to the west as it’s the same owner and developer.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
• Policy LU 5-5: Strongly encourage residential development in a balanced and efficient pattern that reduces sprawl, preserves open space, and creates convenient connections to other land uses, in that the project provides pedestrian access to an adjacent bus line, and is within walking distance of a major shopping center.
• Policy LU 6-1: Promote increased residential densities in that the project provides 12 townhome units on the R7 Multifamily zoned portion of the lot and also provides 12 apartments on the Commercial Office zoned portion of the site.
• Policy LU 6-2: Promote compact urban form that provides residential opportunities in close proximity to jobs, services, and transit, in that the project is a compact design of townhomes located in close proximity to a large shopping center, bus stop and two schools.
• Policy CIR 1-5: When analyzing impacts to the circulation network created by new development or roadway improvements, consider the needs of all users, including those with disabilities, ensuring that pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders are considered preeminent to automobile drivers in that the project provides connectivity to an adjacent to a bus transit line. • Housing Element Goal D-1: Promote Housing Affordability for both Renters and Homeowners; Housing Element Policy C-4: The City will encourage development of new housing to meet a range of income levels, including market-rate housing, and a variety of housing sizes and types. The project is consistent with this Goal and Policy in that it includes both market-rate and affordable housing units and both rental and ownership opportunities.
The number and affordability level of the units offered as affordable will be not less than required by the City’s Inclusionary Housing program, with final numbers determined at the time of or prior to final map recordation and guaranteed affordable in perpetuity.
WHEREAS, granting a Conditional Use Permit for the Project is appropriate as it complies with SMC 17.415.030 as detailed below:
1.The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable provisions of this title in that residential development in a Commercial Office zoning district is allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
2.The establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of the particular case (location, size, design, and operating characteristics), be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area of such use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the City in that:
i. The proposed use of a residential development is compatible with the surrounding uses of residential and office.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
ii. The Project maintains the existing trees and screening to the adjoining residential areas, as well as appropriate setbacks from adjoining properties. iii. The Project is consistent with the R7 Multi-family housing zoning requirements.
iv. The Project, with the approval of a Use Permit, is consistent with the Commercial Office Zoning District.
v. The Project underwent a Traffic Study to ensure that traffic effects on the Healdsburg and Murphy Avenue intersection would not warrant a new traffic signal.
WHEREAS, granting a Tentative Map for the Project is appropriate as it complies with SMC
16.28.070(A) in that:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan as detailed above, and other applicable provisions of SMC Chapter 16 and the State Subdivision Map Act (SMA); and
2. The design of the proposed subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, as described in the State Subdivision Map Act and any guidelines promulgated by the City Council.
i. The Project is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code (CalGreen) requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances, including Tier 2 standards required by the City of Sebastopol (which are higher than the base State requirements for green design). CalGreen Standards require that buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant‐emitting finish materials. The project also incorporates many sustainable features which help reduce energy consumption, such as:
• Low water use landscape
• Native Plant materials
• Accessible/adaptable features in all buildings
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the Development Review Team which consists of the Planning Director, Police Chief, Fire Chief, Building Official, City Engineer, Public Works Superintendent and Associate Planner conducted a preapplication conference of the proposed project and provided comments to the applicant; and, WHEREAS, on December 21, 2022, the Design Review Board conducted a preliminary review of the proposed project and provided comments to the applicant; and, WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a preliminary review of the proposed project; and,
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to review the proposed residential development with the including entitlements of a use permit and tentative map, heard a staff report and public testimony, and deliberated; and,
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2024, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 24-06 recommending the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map subject to Exhibit A, Findings in Resolution 24-06, Exhibit B Specific Conditions of Approval, and Exhibit C Standard Conditions of Approval; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as an infill project. The proposed project meets all criteria of Section 15332, and a traffic study was prepared to ensure that the project would not have result in significant traffic impacts; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed tentative map and conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reported dated November 5, 2024, including all attachments thereto, as well as all oral comments and reports made during the November 5, 2024 public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by refence.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Sebastopol, California does hereby find the proposed project exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as an infill project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Sebastopol, California, does hereby approve for the proposed project at 7621 Healdsburg Avenue (APN 004- 291-019), based on the findings above and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B and Exhibit C:
1. A use permit for residential development in a Commercial Office district.
2. A tentative map for the creation of 12 Townhome units, one building including 12 apartment units, common areas, and on-site parking as shown in Exhibit A.
The above and foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted at a meeting by the City Council on the 5th day of November 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
APPROVED : __________________________
Diana Gardner Rich, Mayor
ATTEST: ____________________________________________________ Mary Gourley, Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________________________ Alex Mog, City Attorney
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
COS
Wx
Wx
Wx
CITY OF
SEBASTOPOL
E
N
ST 1954
L A CO Oct 15,2024-1:00pm C:\Users\lacoclm\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_26296\ 9272.02 TENTATIVE MAP.dwg © ©
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S
NEST 1954 L A CO
SITE
SDx
SSx
X
PACIFIC KNOLLS VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PACIFIC KNOLLS SEBASTOPOL, CA VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 1 OF 2
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
X
X
GAS VALVE
COS
6X6 POST
P
Gx Gx
Gx Gx Gx
OHP OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP OHP OHP OHP
OHP
OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP Wx
Wx
Wx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx
Gx Gx
Gx
X
X
X X X
OHP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
OHP
X
X
X
X
X
X
OHP OHP OHP OHP
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X
X
SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx
SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx
SSx SSx
SSx
Gx Gx Gx Gx Gx Gx Gx
SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx
SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx RIM=135.45'
WEST INV.=126.95'
EAST INV.= 126.59'
SOUTH INV.= 127.85'
SEWER PAINT
RIM= 132.92'
HEAVY LID
NO INVERT OBSERVATIONS
FIRE HYDRANT
STOP SIGN
BUS STOP SIGN
30 MPH SIGN
ADDRESS
SIGN
OBSERVED DIRECTION
OF LATERALS TYP.
GAS METER
SLOPED BLOCK
RETAINING WALL
RIM= 134.46'
WEST INV. = 125.36'
EAST INV.=125.34'
NORTH INV.=128.65'
NORTHWEST INV.=125.77'
SOUTH INV.=126.76'
SOUTHWEST INV.=130.01'
WATER VALVE
WATER VALVE
WATER VALVE
WATER VALVE
WATER VALVE
WATER VALVE
WATER METER
WATER PAINT
WATER METER
TERRACED GARDEN AREA
I BEAM & WOOD
RETAINING WALL
5' HIGH
WOOD RETAINING WALL TERRACED AREA WOOD RETAINING WALL
Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx 130
135
140
145
150
130
135
140
145
150
LOT
LOT SIZE
(SF)
GARAGE AREA
(SF)
FIRST FLOOR
BUILDING
AREA (SF)
SECOND FLOOR
BUILDING AREA
(SF)
TOTAL
BUILDING
FLOOR AREA
(SF)
FLOOR AREA
RATIO
LOT
COVERAGE
MAX
ALLOWABLE
LOT COVERAGE
PROPOSED
PARKING
SPACES
REQUIRED
PARKING
SPACES
1 2,995 236 813 700 1513 43% 29% 65% 2 2
2 1,746 236 785 700 1485 72% 48% 65% 2 2
3 1,617 236 785 700 1485 77% 52% 65% 2 2
4 2,165 236 785 700 1485 58% 39% 65% 2 2
5 2,222 236 813 700 1513 57% 40% 65% 2 2
6 1,708 236 785 700 1485 73% 49% 65% 2 2
7 1,742 236 785 700 1485 72% 48% 65% 2 2
8 2,024 236 785 700 1485 62% 42% 65% 2 2
9 1,872 236 813 700 1513 68% 43% 65% 2 2
10 1,649 236 785 700 1485 76% 48% 65% 2 2
11 1,671 236 785 700 1485 75% 47% 65% 2 2
12 2,445 236 785 700 1485 51% 32% 65% 2 2
13 20,505 0 3,559 5,077 8636 42% 20% NA 18 18
COMMON
PARCEL 11,336 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
EARTHWORK DATA*
CUT 1502
FILL 1141
OFF-HAUL 362
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X X X
PACIFIC KNOLLS VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PACIFIC KNOLLS SEBASTOPOL, CA VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 2 OF 2
E
N
ST 1954
L A CO Oct 15,2024-1:00pm C:\Users\lacoclm\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_26296\ 9272.02 TENTATIVE MAP.dwg © ©
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
EXHIBIT B
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map 7621 Healdsburg Ave 004-291-019, File# 2023-078
PLANNING:
1. Plans and elevations shall be in substantial conformance with plans prepared by Kathy Austin and LACO Associates and stamped received on May 8 th
, 2024, as revised on August
13th, 2024, and on file at the City of Sebastopol Planning Department, except as modified herein.
2. The Use shall be in substantial conformance with the proposed operations as described in the application materials prepared by Kathy Austin, and stamped received on May 8 th
, 2024,
as revised on August 13th, 2024, and on file at the City of Sebastopol Planning Department, except as modified herein.
3. The project’s open spaces shall be maintained by the property owner, not by the City.
4. The project site includes protected trees intended to remain. Protective measures are required for these trees. All final tree protection measures shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Arborist prior to issuance of Improvement Plans.
5. A Tree Removal permit is required for any trees proposed for removal.
6. Design Review approval is required by the Design Review Board for the design of the units, site features, landscaping, and other amenities.
7. The Vesting Tentative Map shall expire 24 months after its approval or conditional approval unless an extension is approved as provided in SMC 16.28.100 and in accordance with the State Subdivision Map Act
8. The Planning Director shall interpret applicable requirements in the event of any redundancy or conflict in the conditions of approval.
9. This approval does not include any signs. Any new signs that will identify the use of this property are subject to the prior approval of the Design Review Board or City staff, as appropriate.
10. All other approvals than the Vesting Tentative Map shall be valid for three years, except that the applicant may request a one (1) year extension of this approval from the Planning Director, pursuant to Section 17.250.050 of the Zoning Ordinance.
11. Project will fully comply with the Inclusionary Housing requirements set forth in Section
17.250 of the Sebastopol Municipal Code, and an Affordable Housing Agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to or concurrent with issuance of Building Permits or the recording of the Final Map, whichever occurs first.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
PUBLIC WORKS:
12. The applicant shall label all onsite sewer lines as private.
13. The applicant shall install a three-valve tree to the City’s 3 inch water main.
14. Fire Hydrants will be part of the private onsite system. The City will provide hydrant testing to ensure fire protection.
15. All projects are subject to Impact Fees as adopted by the City Council at the time the preliminary application was submitted, which are due at the time of issuance of the Building Permit unless otherwise stipulated by the City or required by California Law.
ENGINEERING:
TENTATIVE MAP/FINAL MAP
16. Revise final Tentative Map to show the driveway for the Healdsburg Avenue apartments lot on the east side of property in conformance with Traffic Study Recommendations and Conclusions.
17. Show all proposed easements on revised Tentative Map that run through the subservient lot for utilities, drainage, pedestrian access, etc., and clearly indicate whether public or private.
Also clearly indicate that all private shared-use facilities (e.g., water lines, sewer collectors, storm drains, pathways, etc.) shall be subject to joint maintenance and repair responsibilities.
18. Remove from revised Tentative Map reference to “Propose Easement For Yard Area” shown along the southerly boundary of Lots 2-5.
19. Each parcel shall be numbered or lettered clearly, including common areas and the apartments lot.
20. Prepare and submit for review and approval joint maintenance agreement (JMA) for the maintenance, repair, replacement, etc. of the private common use facilities, including, but not limited to, pedestrian access, water and sewer utilities, storm drain, LID measures, etc.
The approved JMA shall be recorded with the Sonoma County Recorder’s Office concurrent with an approved Final Map.
21. After approval of the Tentative Map, a Final Map prepared by a licensed surveyor and civil engineer, shall be prepared and submitted for the review and approval of the City Engineer.
The Final Map shall conform to the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinances. Upon recording the map, the subdivision is valid.
22. Prior to the recording of the Final Map, the Developer shall complete the required construction of the subdivision improvements in accordance with the approved Improvement Plans, except when the Developer alternatively elects to secure the completion of the required construction by posting with the City of Sebastopol the required securities in the form required and accepted by the City. In this case the Developer shall execute, and enter into, an Improvement Agreement with the City of Sebastopol, agreeing therein to complete the required construction within 24 months after the filing of the Final Map. The fully executed agreement shall be recorded with the Final Map.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
23. The Developer shall execute a covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and its successors, heirs and assigns agreeing to annex this subdivision into the existing City of Sebastopol Lighting Assessment District.
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS
24. Prepare and submit site improvement plans including designs for water distribution and sanitary sewer collection systems that do not require easements and/or joint maintenance agreements wherever possible. This shall include evaluating water and sewer connections to Murphy Avenue for Lots 1 – 12 including the existing sewer collector and ganging banks of water meters from one or more service connections from Murphy Avenue water main.
25. If the proposed project intends to reuse existing water and sewer services, Developer shall verify and provide proof thereof to the City Engineer that existing water and sewer services are adequate for reuse for proposed Project. Otherwise, existing water and sewer services connected into the property shall be removed to the point of connection at the city water and sewer mains, respectively, in accordance with City of Sebastopol Standard specifications and Details.
26. The Project is subject to the City of Sebastopol storm water low impact development requirements. Developer shall prepare and submit Storm Water Low Impact Development Submittal (SWLIDS) package for review and approval. In addition, Developer shall execute a Stormwater BMP Facilities Maintenance/Monitoring Agreement on behalf of itself and its successors, heirs and assigns accepting responsibilities and financial obligation for all maintenance, repair and replacement, therefore. The Agreement shall be recorded with the Sonoma County Recorder’s Office.
27. The Project shall install Murphy Avenue frontage improvements along the property, including curb, gutter, driveway approach, etc. in accordance with improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer in conformance with City Street Standard Details and Specifications, and submitted for city engineer review and approval. Improvements plans shall include but not be limited to street and utility information, all concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalk, walkways, storm drain system, striping and signing, paving, water lines and sewer lines, tree preservation plan, erosion and sediment control, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, and any necessary transitions for the portion of the public street fronting the project, if applicable. All improvements shall be designed in accordance with the City of Sebastopol Standard Details and Specifications.
28. The developer shall prepare and submit storm drainage design calculations supporting the proposed storm drain design.
29. The developer shall prepare and submit the Engineer’s Estimate of Cost of the required subdivision improvements, including contingency, for review and approval of the City Engineer. The estimate of costs shall include the cost of labor pursuant to Section 1720 et seq. of the Labor Code of California.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
GENERAL:
30. Applicant shall apply for any permits required for permanent work or temporary traffic control that encroaches onto Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (ROW). The proposed project will add a new driveway connection off SR-116, it will require an encroachment permit. As part of the encroachment permit submittal process, you may be asked by the Office of Encroachment Permits to submit a completed encroachment permit application package, digital set of plans clearly delineating Caltrans’ ROW, digital copy of signed, dated and stamped (include stamp expiration date) traffic control plans, this comment letter, your response to the comment letter, and where applicable, the following items: new or amended Maintenance Agreement (MA), approved Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD), approved encroachment exception request, and/or airspace lease agreement.
31. Site landscaping shall be generally consistent with the Landscape Plan included as part of the plans stamped received on May 8
th
, 2024, as revised on August 13th, 2024 on file with
the Sebastopol Planning Department. The final landscape plan shall be stamped by a licensed landscape architect and filed with the Planning Department prior to occupancy.
Plans for any irrigation of the site shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. All planting associated with a building, as shown on the approved plan, shall be installed prior to occupancy of that building. Upon the request of an Applicant to receive a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy and at discretion of the Planning Director, landscape installation may be suitably guaranteed by posting a cash bond equal to 100% of the cost and installation of any landscape improvements.
Building Department:
32. The project shall comply with the Green Building regulations contained in the Sebastopol Municipal Code that are in effect at the time the preliminary application was submitted.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
EXHIBIT C
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map 7621 Healdsburg Ave 004-291-019, File# 2023-078
1. All plans shall include a brief description of the project on the cover sheet.
2. All submitted building permit plan check sets shall include a plan sheet incorporating these conditions of approval.
3. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, the plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall be in substantial conformance to those approved by the review body. If any changes are made to submitted plans which were approved by the review body the applicant shall work with the Planning Department to determine if the changes are significant enough to once again be seen by the review body, or if staff can approve the changes. Any changes that have not been approved by Planning staff are not approved. Construction or demolition work that does not conform to the Planning approval is not valid and shall be subject to stop work orders and may require removal.
4. Site landscaping shall be generally consistent with the Landscape Plan included as part of “Exhibit A” on file with the Sebastopol Planning Department. The final landscape plan shall be stamped by a licensed landscape architect and filed with the Planning Department prior to occupancy. Plans for any irrigation of the site shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. All planting shown on the approved plan shall be installed prior to occupancy of the proposed project. Upon the request of an Applicant to receive a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy and at discretion of the Planning Director, landscape installation may be suitably guaranteed by posting a cash bond equal to l00% of the cost and installation of any landscape improvements.
5. Acceptance of the construction drawings and specifications does not release the applicant and owner from correction of mistakes, errors, or omissions contained therein. If, during the course of construction, the field conditions or other previously unknown conditions require a modification or a departure from the accepted plans, the applicant shall provide the modifications or departure and specify the correction of mistakes errors, or omissions in compliance with the CBC and City Standards.
6. The City of Sebastopol and its agents, officers and employees shall be defended, indemnified, and held harmless from any claim, action or proceedings against the City, or its agents, officers and employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this application or the environmental determination which accompanies it, or which otherwise arises out of or in connection with the City’s action on this application, including but not limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney’s fees, or expert witness fees.
7. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be submitted to the City as part of the Building Permit and/or Grading Permit and shall be incorporated into the plans, unless waived by staff. The City’s CMP template, provided by the Planning Department, may be used for small, infill projects. Revisions to the CMP to increase or add on time to the construction timeline shall be coordinated with the Building Official and any additional requests will be at the applicant’s responsibility.
This CMP shall be a binding document. Failure to adhere to the CMP may result in a Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
“Stop Work Notice” being placed on the project. An electronic copy of the APPROVED CMP shall be submitted to the City, and may be posted to the city’s website. The CMP shall be updated as project conditions warrant. Updates to the CMP shall be provided to the City for review and approval. The CMP shall include but not be limited to:
a) Work schedule (start of construction date, road or lane closure intent/dates, important milestones and proposed final dates)
b) Construction Hours
c) Travel routes and turn-around locations with staff approval • Impact to state highways
d) Road and/or lane closures (Applicant to provide information on how many anticipated road closures, and the reasons for each road closure). e) Worker auto parking space locations/construction parking f) Phasing (if applicable)
g) If construction improvements are located in areas of slopes 15% or greater, the Contractor shall provide safe temporary hard surface stair access to the improvements, unless waived by the Building Official. This access shall be shown on the CMP.
h) Projects that require a grading permit shall comply with the City’s grading ordinance.
The CMP may be more stringent if the project is located close to schools or in impacted neighborhoods. A CMP may be required to be modified if a neighborhood becomes “impacted” during the course of the construction. Impacted neighborhoods are defined as areas in geographic proximity (i.e. using the same streets for access) with a significant number of simultaneous construction projects.
The hours of construction activity shall be limited 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays with staff approval, depending on scope of work being done, or unless modified by a project’s Specific Conditions of Approval.
A24-inch by 36-inch weatherproof copy with items A-F posted on site. The remaining Construction Management Plan shall be made available on site. The Construction Management Plan shall be posted on the site as part of the job site signage and should include:
a) Address of the project site.
b) Permitted hours of construction and of deliveries/off-haul. c) Name, e-mail address and direct phone number of the General Contractor. d) Name, e-mail address and direct phone number of the person responsible for managing theproject.
e) Name and direct phone number of the party to call in case of an emergency. f) City of Sebastopol Building Department (707-823-8597).
8. All construction materials, debris and equipment shall be stored on site. If that is not physically possible, an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to placing any construction materials, debris, debris boxes or unlicensed equipment in the right-of-way. The fee for using the right-of-way for storage of construction materials or equipment is $10.00 per day. A minimum of 11’ passable auto traffic clearance (paved travel way) shall be maintained at all times along the roadway. The placing of portable restroom facilities in the City right-of-way will not be permitted.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
9. All portions of the job site shall be maintained in an organized and professional condition. All trash, debris, construction scraps and broken/deteriorated machinery shall be removed from the site by the end of each week. If off loaded construction materials are not used within 2 weeks, they shall be screened from public view. All sidewalks, driveways and public/private roadways fronting the subject site shall be broom cleaned at the end of each business day.
10. A pre-construction meeting is required with city staff for projects that:
a) Require a City encroachment permit, a Caltrans encroachment permit, or a City grading permit; or
b) Have 5 dwelling units or more; or
c) Have a total of 5,000 square feet of building or more; or d) Have a creek setback requirement; or
e) Are required to have a pre-construction meeting under a specific condition of approval.
11. All permits and/or inspection fees required shall be paid in full prior to final occupancy being granted unless otherwise stipulated by the City.
12. All required construction signage and any required tree-protection shall be posted and available for City inspection at the time of the Pre-construction meeting or, if no preconstruction meeting is required, prior to commencing construction. If these measures are not in place at the time of the pre-construction meeting, a re- inspection fee will be required, and issuance of building permit will be delayed.
13. The Planning Director shall interpret applicable requirements in the event of any redundancy or conflict in conditions of approval.
Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval:
14. This approval is valid for a period of three (3) years during which time the rights granted must be exercised. However, the applicant may request one (1) one-year extension of this Use Permit from the Planning Director, pursuant to Zoning Ordinance §17.400.100.
15. The light source for all exterior lighting fixtures shall be shielded from adjacent properties. Cut sheets for all exterior lighting shall be submitted as part of the Design Review or other planning application.
16. For projects with new foundations or retaining walls less than 10’ away from a required setback property lines shall be physically identified (string line or equal), and the applicant shall submit a letter or certificate from a licensed surveyor that confirms that the structure complies with the approved setbacks prior to placing the foundation. For any project that includes new foundations or retaining walls more than 10’ away from a required setback, the applicant may apply for a waiver from this requirement from the City Engineer and Planning Department.
17. For any project that includes new structures within 2 feet of the allowed height limit, a letter or certificate from a surveyor confirming that the height of the roof complies with the approved plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department at the earliest point possible.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
18. All landscape and irrigation plans must be designed in accordance with the most current City of Sebastopol landscape requirements. Prior to providing water service for new landscape areas, or improved or modified landscape areas, the Planning Department must review and approve the project’s working drawings for planting and irrigation systems. Any question regarding the City of Sebastopol current water conservation and Landscape Ordinance should be directed to the Planning Department.
New construction and rehabilitated (renovations or changes made to sites with an existing irrigation system) landscape projects will be affected by these requirements if the altered landscape area is greater than 500 square feet.
19. For any new housing unit development, the developer/owner shall submit the total amount of fees and exactions associated with the project prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy or final inspection.
Engineering and Public Works Department Standard Conditions of Approval:
20. All projects are subject to Impact Fees as adopted by the City Council, which are due at the time of issuance of the Building Permit unless otherwise stipulated by the City.
21. An Encroachment Permit is required from the Public Works Department for any and all work within the public right-of-way. If the work is within a CalTrans right-of way, an Encroachment Permit from CalTrans shall also be procured by the applicant.
Encroachment Permit shall not be issued until the City Engineer approves the applicant’s site improvement plans.
22. Construction within the public right-of-way is limited to that necessary to support the lot's use. This may include but is not limited to: driveways, sidewalks and any utility connections. For all improvements within the public right of way, the applicant shall submit plans to adequately describe the work. Plans shall include but not be limited to drainage details, cross-sections, driveway/roadway grades and utility locations as necessary.
23. The applicant shall prepare and submit site improvement plans for the construction of all improvements including water, sanitary sewer, storm drain, water quality facilities, roadway improvements, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, elevated or structural pedestrian walkways, landscaping, landscape irrigation, signing, striping, joint trench and streetlights. All design and construction shall conform to the latest edition of the City of Sebastopol Design and Construction Standards and other applicable codes, standards, guidelines and specifications. Public improvement drawings shall be drafted in the City-approved sheet format.
24. Once approved by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit PDF files of the signed improvement plans. As-Built record drawings shall also be submitted as PDF files.
25. Deviations from City Standards and applicable Code requirements shall be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant’s engineer shall request all design exceptions in writing.
26. Any improvements, public or private, damaged during construction shall be replaced, Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
by the applicant, in-kind or with new improvements. All cracked, broken, or uplifted sidewalk, driveway and/or curb and gutter fronting the property shall be replaced.
Applicant shall coordinate with the Public Works Department prior to the first submittal of project improvement plans to identify the extents and limits of replacement.
27. An erosion and sediment control plan are required as part of the building permit application. The plan shall be prepared by a certified erosion control specialist and in full compliance with CASQA standards, The plan is subject to review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of the building or grading permit. No modifications to the approved plans shall be made without approval of the City Engineer.
28. Mailbox plans and locations shall be approved by the Sebastopol Postmaster prior to improvement plan approval. The developer shall provide a letter and exhibit showing mailbox locations from the Sebastopol Postmaster approving mailbox locations.
29. City Public Water and Sewer and Drainage utility easements as required by the City Engineer utility companies shall be provided within the development. Easement locations shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
Roadway Improvements:
30. The improvement plans for the first phase of development shall include and provide for the construction of all offsite improvements as required to support full project buildout. Each subsequent phase of development shall construct sufficient onsite roadway and utility improvements to support the cumulative development proposed to be constructed as approved by the City Engineer.
31. Road closures, if permitted by the Project Approval, will only be permitted with prior authorization from the Public Works Department consistent with the City's road closure policy. Signs containing details of the proposed closure must be posted 48 hours in advance. Coordinate road closures with the Sebastopol Public Works Department.
Contact the Public Works Department at 707-823-5331 to obtain a road closure permit.
32. An emergency vehicle access, meeting the requirements of the Sebastopol Fire Department shall be constructed.
33. All private driveway areas less than 24-foot wide shall require the approval of the Sebastopol Fire Department.
34. Sidewalk warps shall be provided to allow a clear five-foot walkway at all locations, including areas where mailboxes, street furniture, streetlights, street signs and fire hydrants are to be installed, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
35. The structural section of all public road improvements shall be designed using a soil investigation which provides the basement soils R-value and expansion pressure test results. A copy of Geotechnical report and structural section calculations shall be submitted with the first improvement plan check.
36. The structural section of the private on-site drive aisles and parking areas shall meet the requirements and recommendations of the geotechnical report for the project.
37. Retaining walls and retaining curbs may be required to protect damage to trees as determined by a licensed Arborist. All retaining structures shall be designed and Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
constructed to minimize damage to trees.
38. Pedestrian curb ramps, meeting City standards and current accessibility requirements, shall be provided at all intersections and crosswalks where sidewalks are proposed.
Drainage Improvements:
39. All project related flooding impacts shall be mitigated by the project developer.
Drainage improvements shall be designed by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California in accordance with the Sonoma County Water Agency's Flood Management Design Manual (FMDM). Public and private drainage improvements shall be shown on the improvement plans and the City Engineer may require the applicant to acquire the review and recommendations by the Sonoma County Water Agency (Sonoma Water) prior to approval by the City Engineer. Private storm drain easements will be required for any portions of the private storm drain not entirely located with the lot being served or for any portion of a private utility located on an adjacent parcel.
40. No lot-to-lot drainage will be allowed between the project site and any adjacent parcels. No concentrated drainage may discharge across sidewalks. All site drains must be connected to the public storm drain system or discharged through the face of curb or to an established waterway.
41. Plans and certifications shall demonstrate compliance of all improvements, including building finished floor elevations, with the City's Flood Ordinance, to the satisfaction of the Building Official and City Engineer. Building finished floor elevations shall be constructed at a minimum of 2 foot above the 100-year storm event water surface elevation as determined by the City and certified by the project engineer. The Engineer of Record shall provide a signed and stamped letter indicating the project meets the requirements of the Ordinance before plan approval.
Stormwater Quality:
42. Projects that create or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area are subject to design and construction requirements of the most recent edition of City of Sebastopol Low Impact Development (LID) Technical Design Manual.
Improvement plans with required LID design features shall be approved by the City Engineer.
43. Projects that will disturb 1.0 acre or more of developed or undeveloped land shall provide evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been submitted by the applicant and received by the State Water Resources Control Board for a General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. Two copies of the project Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the City prior to issuing a grading permit, encroachment permit, or building permit.
44. For required LID features constructed on private property or on street frontage, the owner shall provide a Declaration Letter to the City Manager regarding the owner’s commitment to ongoing maintenance of said LID features (LID Declaration) prior to occupancy.
Grading:
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
45. The improvement plans shall include a site-grading plan prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California as part of the required improvement drawings. Lots shall be generally designed to drain to public and private streets or parking areas, unless otherwise approved in the interest of tree preservation or other unusual circumstances.
46. The City of Sebastopol shall require a grading permit for projects that meet these requirements.
a) Cut or fill exceeding 50 cubic yards
b) Cut or fill greater than 3 feet in depth
c) Cut creating a cut slope greater than 5 feet in height and steeper than 2 units horizontal to 1 unit vertical
d) Fill intended to support a structure or surcharge greater than 1 foot in depth or placed on terrain with a natural slope steeper than 15 percent
47. When required by the Building Official the applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval, a detailed Geotechnical Report prepared by a Geotechnical Engineer registered in the State of California. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved Geotechnical Report.
48. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered during grading operations are different from those anticipated in the Geotechnical Report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations contained in the original soil investigation, a revised soil or geologic report shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer.
It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from hazards of land slippage, erosion, settlement, and seismic activity.
49. Existing wells, septic tanks and/or underground fuel storage tanks that are defective or will no longer be in use shall be permanently destroyed or removed under permit and inspection by the Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department, Well and Septic Division and/or Sonoma County Environmental Health or other designated agency. Underground fuel storage tanks are subject to UST regulations of the State Water Resources Control Board.
50. The grading plan shall clearly show all existing survey monuments and property corners and shall state that they shall be protected and preserved. Should monuments be damaged or destroyed during construction, they shall be replaced by the developer.
51. Improvements plans shall include an erosion control (winterization) plan. The plan shall include an order of work and staging/scheduling component indicating when facilities must be installed and when they may be removed.
52. Sewer services and laterals shall be CCTV inspected to determine if the service needs to be removed and replaced. A copy of the CCTV report shall be provided to the City Engineer. A waiver for CCTV inspection may be waived by the City Engineer, if the sewer lateral has been replaced within ten years of the submittal of the improvement plans. A copy of the documentation evidencing such replacement shall be included in the submittal package.
53. If the proposed project is located in or adjacent to a waterway, within an area designated as habitat for threatened or endangered species, or other special status Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
area, it possibly falls under the jurisdiction of another agency such as the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the California Regional Water Quality Control, or the California Department of Fish & Wildlife, U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, etc. These agencies shall be contacted to determine if the project lies within their respective jurisdictions. All necessary permits and/or approvals shall be obtained prior to the City issuing any permits. If permits are not required, a letter stating so shall be submitted to the City as part of the record.
54. Trees and vegetation shall be trimmed according to Section 8.12 of the Sebastopol Municipal Code. Trees and shrubs shall be kept trimmed so that the lowest branches projecting over public properties provide a clearance of not less than eight (8) feet over sidewalks and not less than twelve (12) feet over streets.
Fire Department. Standard Conditions of Approval:
55. The address shall be posted in accordance with requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code. The Fire Chief shall review and approve all requests for new addresses. Inspection and signoff of address posting shall be coordinated through Building Department.
56.Smoke and CO detectors shall be installed in accordance with the California Building Code. Final inspection and signoff of smoke detectors shall be coordinated through Building Department.
57. Noncombustible roofing shall be provided for:
a. All new roofs shall be non-combustible.
b. Roof Repairs or replacement:
i. Less than 25% - no requirement
ii. 25Hr to 50% - Class C minimum
iii. 50% or more — Non-Combustible
c. In no case shall the roofing material used to be less fire resistive than the existing roof.
NOTE: A "noncombustible" roof is a Class A roof (for other than Group R Occupancies, a Class A or Class A assembly) as defined in the California Building Code and approved by the Building Department.
58. Prior to occupancy, a spark arrester shall be installed on the chimney(s) 3/8" mesh minimum.
Building Department Standard Conditions of Approval:
59. All construction shall comply with all applicable Title 24 Codes in effect at the time of building permit submittal. It is the responsibility of the designer(s) to ensure that all applicable Title 24 codes, as well as any applicable Sebastopol Municipal Codes are incorporated into the design.
60. The project shall comply with the Green Building regulations contained in the Sebastopol Municipal Code that are in effect at the time of building permit submittal.
END OF STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
W-Trans
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
Prepared for the City of Sebastopol
Submitted by
W-Trans
July 24,2024
,-. Kr )-
^'^T$J5
t?ii8.il Fli,^},f, -
\\\ Ballancing Functionality and Livability since 1995
"
\_->/ w"trans.conl
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
W-T?ans
This page intentionatty left blank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Table of Contents
Figures
Study Area, Existing Lane Configurations, Existing Traffic Volumes and Future Traffic Vo1umes...................4 Project, Existing plus Project, and Future plus Project Traffic Volumes.'.'.'.'.....'.......... '.....".......18 Tables
4. Two-Way Stop-Controlled lntersection Level of Service Criteria g. Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour lntersection Levels of Service ................... .....'...'17
10. Future and Future plus Project lntersection Levels of Service......'.'...'....'.. '-.-.-.'..17 Appendices
A. Collision Rate Calculations
B. lntersection Level of Service Calculations
C. QueuingCalculations
1. 2.
3. 14
15 16
16 Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly 2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
W{ians
This page $ntentionatly teft btank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
lntroduction
This report presents an analysis of the potential transportation, traffic, and mobility impacts that would be associated with a proposed residential development to be located on the southeast corner of Healdsburg Avenue (SR 116) and Murphy Avenue in the City of Sebastopol. The traffic study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the City of Sebastopol and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques.
Prelude
The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City staff and policy makers with data that they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential transportation impacts of the proposed project, and any associated improvements that would be required to mitigate these impacts to an acceptable level under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City's General Plan, or other policies. This report provides an analysis of those items that are identified as areas of environmental concern under the CEQA. lmpacts associated with access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and to transiq the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) generated by the project; and safety concerns are addressed in the context of the CEQA criteria. While no longer a part of the CEQA review process, vehicular traffic service levels at key intersections were evaluated for consistency with General Plan policies by determining the number of new trips that the proposed use would be expected to generate, distributing these trips to the surrounding street system based on anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, then analyzing the effect the new traffic would be expected to have on the study intersections and need for improvements to maintain accepta ble operation.
The report is organized to provide background data that supports the various aspects of the analysis, followed by the assessment of CEQA issues and then evaluation of policy-related issues.
Project Profile
Project Description
The proposed residential project site is located on a vacant parcel near the intersection of Healdsburg Avenue/Murphy Avenue. Access would be provided via two new driveways, one on Healdsburg Avenue and one on Murphy Avenue. The project would include 24 residential units, including 12 townhomes with access onlyonto Murphy Avenue and 12 apartments with access only onto Healdsburg Avenue. The proposed project site plan is shown in Figure 1.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July23,2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
HSLDSSURG TVTNU;
J-fu#:- +
I
\
\
ABBR&ANONSJ UEE!!IA!EEEru
@
\
lat::,-r= su pa [.-
r. ---t
ffiffi
I
EEqIICL-QATL TABLE
ffi
::l
:#
;1-
o
oti
Jbol+ zl<Yt9
old
LIts
OliD
ftfi
2 5
b
c
t
tq
s. c1.00
Source: UCO Arrociates 6/24
sem8.ai 6124
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
Figurel -SitePlan @-*n,
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Tra nsportation Setti ng
Study Area and Periods
The study area varies depending on the topic. For pedestrian trips it consists of all streets within a half-mile of the project site that would lie along primary routes of pedestrian travel, or those leading to nearby generators or attractors. For bicycle trips it consists of all streets within one mile of the project site that would lie along primary routes of bicycle travel. For the safety and traffic operational analyses, it consists of the project frontage and the intersection of Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16)/Murphy Avenue and the project access points on both frontages.
Operating conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods were evaluated to capture the highest potential impacts for the proposed project as well as the highest volumes on the local transportation network. The morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and reflects conditions during the home to workor schoolcommute, while an extended p.m. peak period between 2:00 and 6:00 p.m. was counted to capture afternoon traffic from the nearby schools including Analy High School as well as traffic typically reflecting the highest level of congestion during the homeward bound commute.
Study lntersection
Healdsburg Avenue (SR 116)/Murphy Avenue is a three-legged intersection with stop control on the northbound Murphy Avenue approach. Marked crosswalks exist on the west and south legs of the intersection.
There are yield markings on the east and west legs approaching the intersection and Circular Rapid Flashing Beacons are present on the west leg which is the standard crosswalk warning device used in the City of Sebastopol.
Class ll bike lanes exist on SR 1 16, while there are sharrow markings on Murphy Avenue which is a city designated bike route.
The location of the study intersection and existing lane configurations and controls are shown in Figure 2.
Gollision History
The collision history for the study area was reviewed to determine any trends or patterns that may indicate a safety issue. Collision rates were calculated based on records available from the California Highway Patrol as published in their Statewide lntegrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) reports. The most current five-year period available is October 1,2018, through September 30,2023.
The calculated collision rate for the study intersections was compared to average collision rates for similar facilities statewide, as indicated in 2021 Collision Data on Colifornia State Highways, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). These average rates statewide are for intersections in the same environment (urban), with the same number of approaches, and the same controls. The study intersection of Healdsburg Avenue/Murphy Avenue had a calculated collision rate of 0.04 collisions per million vehicles entering (c/mve) based on the four reported crashes, which is belowthe statewide average collision rate of 0.13 c/mve for similar interactions. The collision rate calculations are provided in Appendix A.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July 23,2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
_r.rt
t- !tl+. l
,,.,..1
t!
Lr
t_
'.,1
:-;.
!'t
reb083.ai
1'"
a",
7D4
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
Figure 2 - Study Area, Existing Lane Configurations, Existing Traffic Volumes and Future Traffic Volumes @*"n, 1 Existing
+552(662)
r t7(221
(769)752+
(35)63a
<r P
1 Futurc
+645(999)
t 22(53)
(964)847+
(39)54-l
1I>
sa
LTGTND
O Studylntersection
xx AM Peak HourVolume
{xx) PM PeakHourVolume
Project
Site
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Circulation System
This section addresses the first transportation bullet point on the CEQA checklist, which relates to the potential for a project to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
Pedestrian Facilities
Existing and Planned Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phases, curb ramps, curb extensions, and various streetscape amenities such as lighting, benches, etc. Existing pedestrian facilities along the proposed project site frontage as well as within a one-quarter mile distance of the project site were reviewed.
A generally connected pedestrian network currently exists along SR 116 near the project site. However, there is no sidewalk on the north side of SR 116 west of its intersection with Lyding Lane until Soll Court. An enhanced crosswalk with Circular Rapid Flashing Beacons is present on the west leg of Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16)/Murphy Avenue, which connects to DuFranc Avenue to the northeast, providing pedestrian access to the West CountyJoe Rodota Trail, located 550 feet north of the SR 116/DuFranc Avenue intersection.
Pedestrian Safety
The collision history for the study area was reviewed to determine if anytrends or patterns may indicate a potential safety issue for pedestrians. Collision records available from SWITRS reports were reviewed for the most current five-year period available, which was October 1,2018, through September 30,2023, at the time of the analysis.
During the five-year study period there were no reported collisions involving a pedestrian within a half mile of the project site.
lmpact on Pedestrian Facilities
Given the proximity of commercial uses, it is reasonable to assume that some residents will want to wallc bicycle, and/or use transit for trips from and to the project site. Sidewalk connectivity is generally continuous throughout the surrounding neighborhood and along the project frontage. Per the site plan, there is a proposed pathway along the eastern edge of the site, connecting the existing sidewalkalong the project frontage on Healdsburg Avenue and the proposed internal pedestrian network'
Finding - Pedestrian facilities serving the project site are adequate. The paths proposed and recommended as part of the project would provide adequate access to the existing pedestrian facilities. The project would not conflict with any existing plans or policies relative to pedestrian facilities.
Bicycle Facilities
Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities
fhe Highway Design Manual 7h Edition, Caltrans, 2020, classifies bikeways into four categories:
. Class I Multi-Use Path - a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized.
r Class ll Bike Lane - a striped and signed lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway. . Class lll Bike Route - signage only for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street or highway.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)u!y23,2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
a Class lV Bikeway - also known as a separated bikeway, a Class lV Bikeway is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeway and the motor vehicle traffic lane. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, striped buffers, or on-street parking.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July 23,2024
ln the project vicinitythere are several existing Class l, ll, and lll bikewayfacilities, including the Class I multi-use bicycle and pedestrian West County-Joe Rodota Trail.There are existing Class ll bicycle lanes along SR 1 l6 between the north city limit and North Main Street, along Gravenstein Highway North and Healdsburg Avenue, along Covert Lane between Ragle Road and SR 1 16, and along High School Road-North Main Street between Occidental Road and SR 1 16. DuFranc Avenue to the northeast of the project site provides bicyclist access to the West CountyJoe Rodota Trail, which extends north to Occidental Road and east to Analy High School and provides connection facilities to the Joe Rodota Trail. There are also existing Class lll bike routes in the project vicinity including along Murphy Avenue, most of which feature sharrow pavement markings.
According to the Draft Sanoma County Active Transportation Plan (2024), Class I bicycle facilities are planned on Analy Avenue between North Main Street and Sunset Avenue (in front of and through Analy High School), along Bodega Avenue between Pleasant Hill Road and Nelson Way, on Ragle Road between Covert Lane and Bodega Avenue, along SR 1 '16 between Mill Station RoadAffest County Trail and Keating Avenue and connecting Willow Street/South Main Street to the Joe Rodota Trail. Class lll routes are planned along various streets witlrirr orre rnile of the project vicinity. Bicyclists ride in the roadway and/or on sidewalks along all other streets within the project study area. Table 1 summarizes the existing and planned bicycle facilities in the project vicinity, as contained in the Draft Sonomo County ActiveTransportation Plan.
@
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Class Length
(miles)
Begin Point
I
il
il
il
il
ilt
ilt
ilt
ilt
ill
ilt
ilr
1.68 0.50
o.52
0.64 1.56
0.60 0.48
0.56 0.s2
0.50 0.21
0.38 Occidental Rd
Ragle Rd
North City Limit
Covert Ln
Occidental Rd
Ragle Rd
sR 116
Willard Libby Park
Covert Ln
Covert Ln
Covert Ln
sR116
I
lll
ilt
ilr
ill
ilt
ilt
ilt
ilt
I
r/lv
0.07 0.16
0.05 0.22
0.27 0.22
0.13 0.44
0.23 0.18
0.34 0.52
1.29 N Main St
Pleasant Hill Rd
Covert Ln
MillStation RdMest
County Trail
Willow St/S Main St
Huntley St
Huntley St
Murphy Ave
Eddie Ln
Morris St
Taft St
Willard Libby Park
Florence Ave
Table I - Bicycle Facility SummarY
Status
Facility
Existing
West County/Rodota Trail
Covert Ln
SR 1 16 (Gravenstein Hwy N)
SR1 16 (Healdsburg Ave)
High School Rd/N Main St
Valentine Ave
Danmar DrlNorlee St
Washington Ave
Ragle Rd
Pleasant HillAve
Zimpher Dr
Murphy Ave
Planned
Analy Ave
Bodega Ave
Ragle Rd
sR116
Willow St Connection
Dutton Ave
Florence Ave
Huntley St
Johnson St
McKinley Ave
Sunset Ave
Washington Ave
Wilton Ave
End Point
N Main St
SR 116
Covert Ln
N Main St
sR116
Murphy Ave
Covert Ln
Bodega Ave
Bodega Ave
Bodega Ave
Valentine Ave
Valentine Ave
Sunset Ave
Nelson Wy
Bodega Ave
Keating Ave
Joe Rodota Trail
Bodega Ave
Wilton Ave
Florence Ave
Laguna Pkwy
Petaluma Ave
Johnson St
Murphy Ave
N Main St
Source: Droft Sonoma County ActiveTransportation Plan, Sonoma County Transportation Authority, 2024 lmpact on Bicycle Facilities
The project as proposed would not result in the construction of any new bicycle facilities nor would it impact the ability of the City or Caltrans to construct any planned facilities.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July23,2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Bicyclist Safety
Collision records for the study area were reviewed to determine if there had been any bicyclist-involved crashes during the five-year study period between January 1,2019, and December 31 ,2023. There were no reported collisions involving bicyclists in the study area, therefore no remedial action is recommended.
Finding - Existing and planned bicycle facilities would provide adequate access for bicyclists traveling to and from the project site. The project would not conflict with any policies or plans for bicycle facilities.
Transit Facilities
Existi ng Transit Facilities
Sonoma County Transit
Sonoma County Transit (SCT) provides fixed-route bus service in Sebastopol and surrounriing areas. SCT Route 20 and Rorrte 24 hoth have stops within a half mile of the project site. Route 20 runs from the Coddingtown Mall in the City of Santa Rosa to Monte Rio in West County. Route 24 runs from the Sebastopol Transit Hub to the intersection of 5R 116/Mill Station Road. Existing transit routes and details regarding their operation are summarized in Table 2.
Transit
Agency
Route
Connections
Sonoma CountyTransit
Route #20 Monte Rio
Cr.lddirrgLowrr/5anta Rosa
Route #24 Sebastopol
SR 116/Mill Station Rd
Notes: r lJefrned as the shortest walking distance between the project site and the nearest bus stop Source: sctransit.com/maps-schedules
Two to three bicycles can be carried on most SCT buses, and bike rack space is provided on a first-come, firstserued basis. AddiLiorial bicycles are allowed on SCT buses ar the discretion of the bus operator.
Dial-a-ride, also known as paratransit or door-to-door service, is available for those who are unable to independently use the transit system due to a physical or mental disability. SCT Paratransit is designed to serve the needs of individuals with disabilities within the City of Sebastopol and the greater Sonoma County area. lmpact on Transit Facilities
Given the size of the proposed project, there is unlikely to be substantial new demand for transit service generated by the development, though it is likely that some residents or visitors will occasionally choose to use transit. The existing pedestrian facilities are adequate to provide access from the project site to the transit stops and there are sr,rfficient routes and headways to accommodate the nominal additionaldemand.
Finding - Existing public transit routes are adequate to accommodate the additional demand generated by the project, and existing bus stops are accessible via continuous sidewalks. Transit facilities serving the project site are Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly 23,2024
Distance Service
to Stop
(mi)' Days of
Operation
Time Frequency
Table2-TransitRoutes
< 0.1 Mon-Fri
5at-5un
6:30 a.m. - 9:30 p.m.
6:30 a.rrr. - 9;30 p.m.
50 - 80 min
50 - 1 05 rttir r
< 0.1 Mon-Fri
Sat
7;45 a.m.- 6:30 p.m.
7:45 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
45 - 55 min
45 - 55 min
@
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
therefore considered to be adequate and the project would not conflict with any programs or policies regarding transit.
Significance Finding - The proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact relative to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes as it would be consistent with existing plans, policies, and programs for these modes.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)u!y23,2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Tlre potential for tlre prcrject Lu currflicl or be irrcorrsistent wlth CEQA Guldellnes S 15064.3, subdlvlsion (b) was evaluated based the project's anticipated Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). This is the second bullet point in the CEQA checklist.
Background
The Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with a project is the primary basis for determining traffic impacts under CEQA. Because the City of Sebastopol has not yet adopted standards of significance for evaluating VMT, quidance provided bv the California Governor's Office of Plannino and Research (OPR) "- " ""J in the nrrhliration Tronsportation lmpacts (SB 743) CEQA Guidelines Update and Technical Advisory,2018, was used (referred to herein as the Technical Advisory). These criteria are consistent with those applied by Caltrans as outllned inthe Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation lmpact Study GurUe, California Department of Transportation, May 2020.
Signif icance Threshold
The OPR Technical Advisory provides VMT threshold guidance for several land use types. Residential uses are assessed using a home-based VMT per capita metric, with VMT significance thresholds set at a level of 15 percent below the citywide or regional average. The Technical Advisory indicates that it may be appropriate to apply a countywide, rather than regional, average if most people both live and work within the smaller geographic area.
According to data contained in the Sonoma CountyTrovel Behavior Study, Fehr & Peers,2020, approximately 98 percent of Sebastopol's vehicle trips remain within Sonoma County. Use of a common model to produce both project-level and threshold values also allows for a clear "apples to apples" assessment. Accordingly, the applied significance threshold was based on the Sonoma County per-capita VMT average rather than the nine-County Bay Area regional average.
SCTA operates and maintains the regional travel demand model that produces baseline VMT estimates. The VMT thresholds and projections applied in this analysis reflect the SCTMl9 model updated in December 2021, which remains the current version as of the June 2024 timeframe of this analysis. Based on output from the SCTA model, the existing average residentral VMI per capita in the County of Sonoma is 16.60 miles. VMT significance thresholds are set at I 5 percent below this level, or '14. 1 'l miles. Accordingly, the project would have a potentially significant impact on VMT if its projected residential VMT per Capita exceeds 14.1 1 miles.
Profect VMTAssessment
VMTperCapita
Tlre SCTA rrtudel irtcludes traffic analysls zones (TAZ) coverlng geographic areas throughout Sonoma County. I he Pacific Knolls project site is located within TAZ 808, which has a baseline VMT per capita of 16.46 miles. For the project to achieve the applied threshold of 14.11VMT per capita, its projected VMT per capita would need to be reduced by at least 14,3 percent.
Consideration was given to whether adjustments to the baseline per-capita VMT estimates produced by the SCTA model are warranted to reflect the project's characteristics. SCTA has developed and made available a VMT Reduction Tool to assist in making project-specific VMT adjustments as well as quantifi/ VMT mitigation measures.
One of the characteristics having the greatest influence on VMT levels, thereby requiring adjustments to baseline values, pertains to the residential density of a development. The SCTA VMT Reduction Tool indicates that average residential densities exceeding 9.1 units per acre can be expected to effectively reduce per capita VMT. The residentialdensity of the proposed project is 18.8 dwelling units per acre, which based on the SCTAVMT Reduction Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project @' July 23,2O24 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Tool results in a VMT reduction of 23.3 percent below baseline VMT per capita values. Applying this percentage reduction yields an adjusted value of 12.62 VMT per capita, which is below the applicable significance threshold of 14.1 1 VMT per capita. Upon including adjustments to account for the project's residential density, the project would therefore be considered to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. A summary of the VMT analysis is shown in Table 3.
VMT Metric Project VMT per Capita
Threshold
Met?
Residential VMT per Capita
(Countywide Baseline)
Notes: VMT Rate is measured in VMT per Capita, or the number of daily miles driven per residenU TAZ=Traffic Analysis Zone; du/acre=dwelling units per acre; t equal to 15 percent below Countywide average;2 includes adjustments for residential density per methodology contained in the SCTA VMT Reduction Tool Finding - The project would be expected to result in a less-than-significant VMT impact.
Yes
Countywide VMT per Capita
Adjusted
(Density)2
Significance
Thresholdl
Unadjusted
(TAZ808)
Average
16.60 14.11 16.46 12.62
Table 3 - Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Summary
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July23,2024 @'
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Safety lssues
Thc potcntial for the project to impact safety was evaluated in tentls of tlre adequacy ul'siglrt distarrce and need for turn lanes at the project access locations, as well as the adequacy of stacking space in the left-turn lane at the study intersection. This section addresses the third transportation bullet on the CEQA checklist which is whether or not the project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).
Site Access
Access to the site would be provided by two new driveways: one on Murphy Avenue that provides aeeess to only the townhome units and one on Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16) that provides access to only the apartment units. lt is understood that the project designers explored an interior project access that connected both driveways; however, the change in topography was challenging so this concept was abandoned.
Queuing
The City of Sebastopol does not prescribe thresholds of significance regarding queue lengths. However, an increase in queue length due to project traffic was considered a potentially significant impact if the increase would cause the queue to extend out ofa dedicated turn lane into a through traffic lane, or the back ofqueue into a visually restricted area, such as a blind corner. lf queues would already be expected to extend past a dedicated turn lane or into a visually restricted area without project traffic, the addition of project traffic was considered to eonstitute a potentially adverse effect only if it would cause a new unacceptable conditions; in other words, if tlre queue were already beyond the turn lane and the project would cause it to stack into an adjacent intersection or a visually restricted area, and that would not occur without the project, that would be considered an impact.
Queuing in the existing westbound left-turn lane on Healdsburg Avenue at the study intersection was evaluated using a methodology contained in"Estimoting Maximum Queue Length ot tJnsignalized lntersections,,,John T. Gard, ITE Journal, November 2001. Queuing was evaluated here to determine if left-turn movements out of the project would be in conflict with queued vehicles in the westbound left-turn lane. Maximum queue lengths were estimated by assttming vehirle lengths of 25 feet and multiplying that by the number of vehicles expected to queue,
Based on Future plus Project volumes, the maximum queue in the Healdsburg Avenue westbound left-turn lane was determined to be two vehicles, or 50 feet during the a.m. peak horrr, and three vehicles, or 75 feet during the p.m. peak period. The westbound left-turn lane has approximately 150 feet of storage space preceding the proposed driveway on Healdsburg Avenue. Therefore, the existing turn lane is adequate to accommodate the anticipated queue length and the maximum anticipated queue would not be expected to conflict with left turns out of the project driveway at this location.
Queuing calculations for the study intersection are provided in Appendix C.
Finding - The existing storage space in the turn lanes at the study intersection is adequate to accommodate the maximum anticipated queue.
Driveway Conflicts
Murphy Avenue Access - The project access would be located approximately 120 feet south of the south leg crosswalk at SR 1 16. Given the stop control on Muphy Avenue and low traffic volumes, the addition of the driveway would not result in significant conflicts with traffic on Muphy Avenue.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project @, July 23,2024 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
SR 116 (Healdsburg Avenue) Access - The project access is proposed approximately 160 feet east of Murphy Avenue and slightly offset to the east with DuFranc Avenue. Turn movements at the driveway were assessed as follows.
o Left turns into the site should operate acceptably as vehicles could queue in the center two-way left-turn lane to make the left turn and should not interfere with left turns onto DuFranc Avenue as the movements do not overlap.
. Left-turn movements onto Healdsburg Avenue from the site could be made by turning into the two-way leftturn lane before merging onto westbound Healdsburg Avenue. However, this movement would present several points of conflict. Exiting vehicles from the project would be turning into the two-way left-turn lane where vehicles are entering for left-turns onto Murphy Avenue. Also, these exiting vehicles would present conflicts with left-turn movements into and out of DuFranc Avenue. A point of access further to the east of the project site would be more optimal.
Significance Finding - The proposed location of the driveway on Murphy Avenue is considered acceptable. The driveway on SR 1 16 (Healdsburg Avenue) presents conflicts and therefore results in a potential safety impact.
Recommendation - Restricted access to right-turn in/right-turn out only was considered, but was not recommended, since this is the only access for this portion of the project. The project driveway on SR 1 16 should be relocated to the eastern side of the project site to minimize conflicts with other vehicle movements to and from Healdsburg Avenue.
Significance after Mitigation - With the driveway located to maximize separation from Dufranc Avenue, the project's impact on safety would be less than significant.
Sight Distance
Sight distances along Healdsburg Avenue and Murphy Avenue at the proposed new project driveways were evaluated based on sight distance criteria contained inthe Highway Design Monual published by Caltrans. Though Caltrans does not indicate a recommended sight distance for driveways in urban areas, for safety reasons the stopping sight distance was evaluated using the approach travel speed as the basis for determining the recommended sight distance. Additionally, the stopping sight distance needed for a following driver to stop if there is a vehicle waiting to turn into a side street or driveway was evaluated based on the stopping sight distance criterion and approach speed on the major street. Based on a posted speed limit of 30 mph for Healdsburg Avenue, the minimum stopping sight distance needed is 200 feet; for a posted speed limit of 25 mph on Murphy Avenue, the required minimum stopping sight distance is 150 feet.
Using both field measurements and aerial imagery it was determined that sight distance at the driveway on Healdsburg Avenue is more than 250 feet in each direction and exceeds the stopping sight distance needed for vehicles traveling five mph above the posted speed limit of 30 mph. The sight distance at the driveway location on Murphy Avenue was measured at 150 feet or more in each direction which meets the stopping sight distance requirement for the prima focie speed limit of 25 mph. As landscaping and signage can impede sight lines, any landscaping or signage placed within the vision triangle at the driveway should be less than three feet in height or more than seven feet above the pavement surface to maintain a clear line of sight.
Finding - Adequate sight distance exists at both the proposed and preferred driveway locations. This could be impacted by the design, however.
Recommendation - Any landscaping or signing proposed near the driveways should either be placed outside the vision triangle of drivers entering from the driveway or be trimmed to lie below three feet in height or above seven feet.
Significance Finding - Sufficient sight distance is anticipated to be available at the new driveways.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly23,2024 @'
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Gapacity Analysis
lntersection Level of Service Methodologies
Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types 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. A unit of measure that indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation.
The study intersection was analyzed using the "Two-Way Stop-Controlled" methodology published in the Highway Capacity Monual (HCM),6th Edition, Transportation Researeh Board,2016. This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle. This methodology determines a level of service for each minor turnlng movement by estimating the average delay in seconds per vehicle. Results are presented for the stop-controlled approaches together with the weighted overall average delay for the intersection.
The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Table 4.
LOS A Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Gaps in traffic are readif available for drivers exiting the minor street.
LOS B Delay of 10 to 15 seconds. Gaps in traffic are somewhat less readily available than with LOS A, but no queuing occurs on the minor street.
LOS C Delay of 15 to 25 seconds. Acceptable gaps in traffic are less frequent, and drivers may approach while another vehicle is already waiting to exit the side street. 105 n Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. There are fewer acceptable gaps in traffic, and drivers may enter a queue of one or two vehicles on the side street.
LOS E Delay of 35 to 50 seconds. Few acceptable gaps in traffic are available, and longer queues may form on the side street.
LOS t- Delay of more than 50 seconds. Dtivets nray wait fcrr h:rrrg periuds belure Llrere is arr acceptable gap in traffic for exiting the side streets, creating long queues.
Reference: Highway Capacity Manual,Iransportation Research Board, 20,l 6 Traff ic Operation Standards
Caltrans
The study intersection of Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16)/Murphy Avenue is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, but Caltrans does not have a standard of significancc rclativc to opcration as this is no longer a CEQA issue. The Vehicte MilesTraveled-FocusedTransportation Impoct Study Guide (TISG), published in May 2020, replace dthe Guide for the Preporation of Traffic Impact Studies,2002. As indicated in the TISG, the Department is transitioning away from requesting LOS or other vehicle operation analyses of land use projects and will instead focus on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Adequacy of operation was therefore evaluated using the City of Sebastopol's standards for intersections.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July23,2024
Table 4 - Two-Way Stop-Controlled lntersection Level of Service Criteria @.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Cityof Sebastopol
The following criteria referenced in the Draft Environmental tmpact Reporf (DEIR) for the 2016 Sebostopol General plan lJpdate, May 2016, De Novo Planning Group, were applied in order to determine if the project would have an adverse effect on operation at the three study intersections within the city limits:
r Utilize a Level of Service objective of LOS D at intersections to evaluate conditions and impacts, with primary focus on access and safety.
o At unsignalized intersections, level of service shall be determined for both controlled movements and for the overall intersection. Controlled movements operating at LOS E or F would be considered acceptable if:
o The intersection is projected to operate at LOS D or better overall; and o The projected traffic volume on the controlled movement is relatively low (30 vehicles or less per hour on approaches with single lanes, 30 vehicles or less per hour on lanes serving left turns and through movements).
r For intersections already operating worse than LOS objectives, development projects should not contribute substantially to further decline in LOS (causing the LOS to decline by a letter grade from LOS E to LOS F) or by more than a five percent increase in delay for intersections currently operating at an unacceptable LOS.
It was also considered an adverse effect on operations if project traffic would cause an intersection operating acceptably at LOS D or better to operate unacceptably at LOS E or F. lt is also noted Policy CIR 1-5 of the City of Sebastopot 2040 General Ptan, November 2016, De Novo Planning Group, states that "when analyzing impacts to the circulation network created by new development or roadway improvements, consider the needs of all users, including those with disabilities, ensuring that pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders are considered preeminent to automobile drivers." ln other words, there should be careful review to ensure that automobile improvements do not negatively affect the experiences of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders.
Existing Gonditions
The Existing Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation based on existing traffic volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. This condition does not include project-generated traffic volumes. Existing traffic counts were obtained for the study intersection on May 29,2024, while area schools were in session.
Under Existing Conditions, the study intersection operates acceptably according to City General Plan standards during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. lt should be noted that the p.m. peak hour captures the largest traffic volume in a single hour during the extended p.m. peak period between 2:00 and 6:00 p.m. The existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2. A summary of the intersection Level of Service calculations is presented in Table 5, and copies of the calculations are provided in Appendix B.
Study lntersection
Approach
PM PeaK
Delay tOS
1. Healdsburg Ave (SR 1 16)/Murphy Ave
Northbound (Murphy Ave) ApProach
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics
Future Conditions
Future intersection turning movements were obtained from the Circulation Element of theCity of Sebostopol 2040 General P/cn which represents General Plan Buildout conditions. Under anticipated future volumes, the
1.0 20.9
A
c
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly 23,2024
AM Peak
Delay LOS
A
C
1.7 24.9
Table 5 - Existing Peak Hour lntersection Levels of Service @\
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
AM Peak
Delay tOS
A
D
3.2 i4.1
Table 6 - Future Peak Hour lntersection Levels of Service northbound approach at Healdsburg Avenue/Murphy Avenue is expected to operate at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour, which would not be considered acceptable operation per City General Plan standards. Future volumes are shown in Figure 2, operating conditions are summarized in Table 6, and copies of the calculations are provided in Appendix B.
Study lntersection
Approach
1. Healdsburg Ave (SR 1 16)/Murphy Ave
NB (Murphy Ave) Approach
PM Peak
Delay LOS
2.0 37.1
A
E
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics,'Bold text = deficient operation Project Conditions
Trip Generation
The anticipated vehicle trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the lnstitute of Transportation Engineers (lTE) in Trip Generotion Monual, llth Edition, 2021. Since the site is currently undeveloped, there are no existing trips. The trip generation potential of the project as planned was developed using the published standard rates for Single Family Attached Housing (Land Use #215) and Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) (l and tlse #2?0), as the description of these land uses most elosely matches the proposed project. Based on application of these rates, the proposed project is expected to generate an average of 1 67 trips per day, including 1 1 a.m. peak hour trips and 13 trips during the p.m. peak hour during the typicalweekday peak hour. These results are summarized in Table 7.
Land Use PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips ln Out
Single Family lnttached)
Multifamily Housing
Total 1385
Note: du = dwelling unit
Trip Distribution
The pattern used to allocate new project trips to the street network was determined by reviewing existing turning movcmcnts at the study intersection as well as employnrent patten'ls fol resiclerrl.s uf tlre City of Sebastopol as indicated by the 2010 Census. Since traffic conditions are generally most critical during the weekday p.m. peak hour, tltese distribution assumptions are prlmarlly based on the expected trip routes during that time. The distribution assumptions shown in Table 8 were used.
0.57 0.51
74 64
3 2
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July 23,2024
Units Daily
Rate Trips
AM Peak Hour
Rate Trips In out
12 du
12 du
86 81
7.20 6.74
624
523
0.48 0.40
167 11 4 7
Table 7 - Trip Generation Summary
@.
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Percent DailyTrips AM Trips
5 6
41o/o
59o/o
68 99
lOOo/o 167 11
Table 8 - Trip Distribution Assumptions
Route PM Trips
SR 1 16 (TolFrom the North)
SR 1 16 (To/From the South)
TOTAL 13
Existing plus Proiect Conditions
Upon the addition of project-generated traffic to the existing volumes, the study intersection is expected to operate acceptably during both peaks. lt should also be noted that traffic signals are not warranted under Existing or Existing plus Project volumes. The analysis results are summarized in Table 9, and copies of the calculations are provided in Appendix B. Project trafflc volumes, including at the driveways, and Existing plus Project volumes at the study intersection are shown in Figure 3.
5 8
Existing plus Project
AMPeak PMPeak
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. Healdsburg Ave (SR 1 16)/Murphy Ave
Northbound (Murphy Ave) APProach
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics
Finding - The study intersection would be expected to operate acceptably per City standards with the addition of project traffic to existing volumes during both the a.m' and p'm. peak hours' Future plus Proiect Gonditions
Upon the addition of project-generated traffic to the anticipated future volumes, the northbound approach at Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16)/Murphy Avenue would be expected to continue operating unacceptably during the p.m. peak and deteriorate to LOS E during the a.m. peak. Future plus Project intersection operations are summarized in Table 10, and volumes are shown in Figure 3. Copies of the calculations are provided in Appendix B.
Study lntersection
Approach
1.8 25.6
A1.1 A
D 21.3 C
Study lntersection
Approach
Future plus Project
AMPeak PMPeak
LOS Delay LOS
1. Healdsburg Ave (SR 1 16)/Murphy Ave
NB (Murphy Ave) Approach
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Bold = Unacceptable operation; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics The northbound approach of SR 116/Murphy Avenue would continue operating at LOS E with the addition of project traffic during the p.m. peak. However, the project's effect would be considered acceptable since the delay *orld O" expected to increase by less than five percent. The project would cause operation to deteriorate from
3.4 35.2
A 2.1
E 38.2
A
E
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July 23,2024
Existing Conditions
AMPeak PMPeak
Delay LOS Delay LOS
A
C
1.7 24.9
1.0 A
20.9 C
Table 9 * Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Future Conditions
AMPeak PMPeak
Delay LOS Delay LOS
3.2 34.1
A2.OA
D 37.1 E
Table 10 - Future and Future plus Project Intersection Levels of service .@'
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
$
;r
{t:
\,Y
t,
"*
\#/ :l
lrt.:
f-l' it
*
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
Flgure 3 - Project, Existing plus project, and Future plus project Traffic volumes @.,,,n, 1 Project
@tFst, s.
(211+ =st
(2Yt
*1(1)
f 1(2)
2 Project
f 1(2)
+i r>
=!( 9= (212+
(2)1 -1
3 Project r4(3)
N
L
@rf
6' 6' st !2
1 E+P
(37)84 *
(771\753+
+553(663)
{18(24)
LEGEND
O Study lntersection
O Project Driveway
E+P Existing plus Project
F+P Future plus Project
xx AMPeakHourVolume
PM PeakHourVolume
seb083.ai 7124
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
LOS D to LOS E during the morning peak hour and the approach volumes exceed 30 vehicles, which would be considered unacceptable. However, as the increase in delay is only 1.2 seconds, or 3.5 percent, this would also be considered acceptable.
It is noted that the Peak Hour Volume traffic signalwarrant would be met bythe future volumes, both without and with the project, during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours indicating that at some point in the future, a traffic signal may be needed at the intersection of SR 1 16/Murphy Avenue.
Given that the intersection would operate unacceptably without the project under anticipated future volumes, even though the project would contribute to unacceptable operation during the morning peak hour as well, this project on its own does not cause this condition. Further, Caltrans does not have a standard for operation, and even with the anticipated LOS E operation drivers would be experiencing delays that are relatively minor (less than 40 seconds) so Caltrans may not accept signalization of this location. Finally, model volumes are often overly conservative, in which case the volumes that would warrant signalization may never be achieved. The City may therefore prefer to defer any potential improvements at this location until such time as there is a demonstrated need for them.
Finding - Though the northbound approach of SR 116/Murphy Avenue would operate unacceptably under Future plus Project volumes or without project traffic added, the delay would not increase by more than five percent. Similarly, where operation would deteriorate from low LOS D to high LOS E during the morning peak hour, the 1.2-second increase in delay would not represent an adverse effect. Therefore, based on City standards, the addition of project traffic to future volumes would not result in an adverse effect.
Recommendation - Since the peak hour volumes at SR 1 16lMurphy Avenue would warrant a traffic signal under future volumes, the City may wish to monitor volumes to determine if traffic signal volume warrants are met for the intersection and signalization should be considered.
Driveway Operation
Although operation is generally not considered for private driveways, an analysis was performed to determine the amount of delay drivers exiting the site would be expected to encounter. For the driveway on Healdsburg Avenue (SR 116) the maximum calculated average delay would occur during the p.m. peak hour when 23.8 seconds of delay would be expected. Drivers exiting via the Murphy Avenue driveway would be expected to experience a maximum of 9.2 seconds of delay based on future a.m. peak hour volumes. These levels of delay would be well within what is expected for entry to a public street.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly 23,2024 @'
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Gonclusions and Recommendations
a
a
a
a
Conclusions
The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 167 trips per day, including l1 a.m. peak hour trips and 13 trips during the p.m. peak hour on a typical weekday.
The existing and planned pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities provide adequate access to and from the project site and the project does not conflict with any policies, plans or programs for these modes, therefore having a less-than-significant impact on these modes.
The project is expected to meet the applicable significance threshold for vehicle miles traveled.
Left-turn movements onto Healdsburg Avenue from the site would present several points of conflict including with vehicles entering the two-way left-turn lane approaching Murphy Avenue and vehicles making left turn movements into and out of DuFranc Avenuc.
Sight distances at both the driveway on Healdsburg Avenue and the driveway on Murphy Avenue meet the stopping sight distance requirements for the posted speed limits on either roadway.
Under existing conditions with and without the project, the study intersection operates acceptably and would continue to do so per City standards.
The northbound approach at Healdsburg Avenue (SR 116)/Murphy Avenue is expected to operate unacceptably under Future and Future plus Project conditions. The addition of project traffic to future volttmes would not result in an adverse impact, per the City's standards since thc incrcasc in dclay would be less than five percent.
A traffic signal installation at the intersection of SR 1 16 (Healdsburg Avenue)/Murphy Avenue is not currently warranted, but would be warranted under future volumes, without or with the project.
The study driveways would be expected to operatc with an acccptable level of delay based on project trips and future volumes.
a
a
a
a
Recommendations
The driveway on SR 116 (Healdsburg Avenue) should be relocated to the eastern side of the project site to minimize conflicts with vehicle movements to and from Healdsburg Avenue. Restricted access to right-turn in/right-turn out only was considered, but was not recommended, since this is the only access for this portion ofthe project.
The City may wish to monitor volumes at the intersection of Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 l6)/Murphy Avenue visi-vis traffic signal warrants to determinc potcntiol timing for a future traffic signal installation.
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project @' July 23,2024 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Study Participants and References
Study Participants
Principal in Charge
Principal Planner
Assistant Engineer
Graphics
Editing/Formatting
Quality Control
Steve Weinberger, PE (Civil, Traffic), PTOE
Zack Matley, AICP
Alyssa Labrador, EIT
Jessica Bender
Jessica Bender, Rebecca Mansour
Dalene J. Whitlock, PE (Civil, Traffic), PTOE
References
2021 Coltision Data on Catifornio State Highwoys, California Department of Transportation, 2023 City of Sebostopol2040 GeneralPlan,Cily of Sebastopol, 2016 Draft EnvironmentallmpactReport (DEIR) forthe 2016 SebastopolGeneral PIan Update, City of Sebastopol, 2016 Draft Sonoma County ActiveTransportotion PIan, Sonoma County Transportation Authority, 2024 "Estimating Maximum Queue Length at lJnsignalized lntersections,"John T. Gard, ITE Journal, November 2001 Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Heatth and Equity, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2021 Highwoy Copacity Manuol,6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2016 Highway Design Manual, Tth Edition, California Department of Transportation, 2020 Moving Cooler: An Anatysis of Transportotion Strotegies for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions, U Ll, 2009 SCTMl9 - rev. 12/2l Travel Demand Model, SCTA, 2021
Sonoma County Transit, http://sctra nsit.com/
Sonoma CountyTravel Behavior Study,Fehr & Peers, 2020
Statewide lntegrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), California Highway Patrol, 2018-2023 Transportation lmpocts (SB 743) CEQA Guidetines Update and Technical Advisory, California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR),2018
Trip Generation Manual,l 1th Edition, lnstitute of Transportation Engineers,202l Vehicle MilesTraveled-FocusedTronsportation tmpoct Study Guide, California Department of Transportation, 2020 SEBO83
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July23,2024 @'
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
\ffjl?ans
This page intentlonaily teft btank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Appendix A
Collision Rate Calculations
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
)uly 2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
W-Trans
This page intentlonatty teft htank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
lntersection Collision Rate Worksheet
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
Intersection # 1: Healdsburg Avenue (SR 1 16) & Murphy Avenue Date of Count: WednesdaY, MaY 29, 2024
Number of Collisions:
Number of lnjuries:
Number of Fatalities:
Average Daily Traffic (ADT):
Start Date:
End Date:
Number ofYears:
1 0
0 1 5500
October 1, 201 8
September 30, 2023
5 lntersection Type: Tee
Control Type: StoP & Yield Controls
Area: Urban
Number of Collisions x 1 Million
Collision Rate =
ADT x Days per Year x Number of Years
1 x 1,000,000
Collision Rate = 15,500 x 355 x5
Collision Rate Rate Rate
Study lntersection
Statewide Avetage*
0.04 c/mve 0.0olo
Notes
ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection " 2021 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans O.0olo
6t1812024
W-Trans Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
queg
ryag fi1uuollusluts$ed $lr{j
sueJl-JlA
Agenda Item Number 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Appendix B
lntersection Level of Service Galculations
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July2024 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
@-rrans
This page intentlonally teft hlank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
HCM 6Ih TWSC
1: Mumhv Ave &
HCM 6th T\ /SC
1: Mumhv Ave &
lnlDelay,
Lsne
Tafficvol, wM
HCM LOS
TEfrc Vol, veM
Conii.tig P*, #hr
soncontol
RT chrnmtsod
lnlDelay,Seh
HCM LOS
83 62 62 28 37
662 2A 37
02719
Fre Sbp Sbp
Nso - llons -0
0000 g7 s7 s7
222 s229S
622.
3.318
-:
3{i}
CdfitW Pedc fir
SignContol
RT ChennoEd
752 83 11 $2 g 62
0191301919
Fr€e Frs Fre Frce Sbp SbP
-Nw -Nm -Nfra
Sldage Lengh
v€h in Medbn sbago,
f
Ga&, %
Peak Hdr Felt
Sbge
1 Slag€
2 CdhlHdwy
Crit€l Hduy SE 1
Crit€l Hdwy sb 2
Potcapt Mall@r
Sbge I
6bge 2
Plabon bl@fied.
%
ild CaFl Mansw
Sbge I
Sbge2
HcM contol oolay, s 0 03 21.9 00
082
066
?69 $ 22
02715
- Nds
97 S7 s7
222
?03 38 2s
P6ak Hou Faclt
Slorage Lengh - 125
Voh in tilodhn Shs, * 0 '
GE&,% 0
-
-125
0 00
00 88 80 88 88 88
22222
7210627?,m
946 1S3
008
755
842
5!2
6A2
3 518
118
424
84 il0
245
115
40 4.12
910
684
8A2 6.22
Sbge I
Sbge
2 sil6lttJ*y
Crit@l Hdry Sb I
Oii6l Hd$t sb
2 Polc4.l MaHw
Sbge 1
sge 2
Plabonbl@ked,
%
Mdcq-l MamM
Stlp l
Shge2
2.218
7U
lfi 3lC
245
387
480
714
trcM Conhl 0s1ry. 6 0 0.3 20.0
1 Repd
c
HCM LaneVrc Rab
HClil Cdlol Dday (s)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM 95h 96ds o{veh)
288
0379
243c
11 oo27
0.1 HCM LaneVrc tub
HCM contol Dday (3)
HCM Lane LOS
HCM Ssh itr]€ A(v.h)
0.03 9.8
0.1 N3
0.229
203c
0.9 Traffc Sludy b Se Paci[c Knolls Poj*t - N Exis$ng Syndo 11 Reft Pa9e I
T6ffc sludy ltrh€ Padfrc Knolls Prcjsl- PM Exblng Syrdo 1 oil12n021
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Hciil 6th T\ /rsc& 06t1n024
HCM 6th T\ /SC
1:
2 06t12n024
Lane
tEfic Vol, slrh
CdftEU Pr&, ilrr
5€nUontol
RT Chdm&.d
sbo l
Sh!€ 2
tr1t6l H6l,
Crit6l Hdsy Slg
1 orfr€l tullly 6b2
Potc+lMftW
Sbgel
5ag
27 lre
N@
u7000
0?
82 6?
t9
sbp
Nuc
53 e80 35 1902?
Fre Fre Sbp
-N@
004 39 gil 30 an
- Nffe
111
111
19 Slop
Nffo
22 U5 45 15027
F@ Free Sbp .k
-125,0
00 00 s7 07 97 9? 97 22222
40 56 1030 30 64
2208 1060
t04t
1107
gaz 6.22
5.42 5.12
3.518 3.318
1S 272
g0
t06
T€lts Vol, ftlvlt
caillclhq Po*, *lF
Sign Conhl
FllolEnmtud Slffigs Leng0r
Vsh frr l&dlan gbtgc. *
Gra&. ol
P6al Hdr Felfr
HcaW Vchiclcs, &
Mml Flo{
126 0
00 00 s7g7s7s7a
22222
6E 23 €85 18 r14
2 873
08 305
231
317
&7
0.478
37.1 2.3
D
Sloh0e Lohoh
Gm*, Yo
Poat HqFaald
Mml Flo{
0 072
004
09$ 0 1061
Sb0o 2
Plabon b'Gked, Yo
MovCaF1 li&muw
gbg6
1 ShSe
2 qffd Hd$y
Cfiml Hdsy SE 1
Clilel Hdry Sb
2 PotCW-l MsMw
Sbge 1
. lbget
Plabonblftled,
%
Mdc*lt&sws
sbtr I
Sbge2
HCM tOS
HCMCoitd o€hy F)
HCM LaneLOS
HCM Ssh 96b Atvoh)
Mov C4,2 Maneuwr
ghso
1 Sbge2
HCMTOS
43 262
1il
331
264
0.085
it.lB
03 HCM Cqrol fthy (6)
HCMLane IOS
Hcil 05h gtfe 0(v6h) 0.{
Thffc Stody lor he Pacinc Xnolls Prcjsl - m F!ture Syndro 1 1 Repcl trgc I
TEtrcSludyldSePadficKnollsPOsl-PMFuture SyndD 1 1 Repd
Page
1 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
HCIV 6th TWSC
1: Murohv Ave &
06r2n024
Hclil6th T\ /SC l MumhvAve & Healdsburo Ave 06tnn024
Inl Delay. *h
GB&, %
PsktuFtu
ilml Fld,
LaneConfrgumtons
Tdticvol, stfi
conficling Pods,i{ilf
SignConfol
RI Chstrk€d
SloEge l€ngh
V6hinMedsshrag6,*
0 Gm*.%
0 PoallhuFaff 97
HearyVehides, %
2 [,!mt Fw 795
lnl Delay, tuh 1.1
HCM LOS
Lane
Tbficvd. EHh
Cofic8ig P*, tllr
SignConhl
RT Chnolhd
37 61 30 01
sil
19 13
Shp Sbp
- Nos ,1250
00 00
88 80 8E 88 88
22222
73 0028 4{ 73
912
587
8.42 6.22
5.42 6i2
3.518 3.318
il? 328
s2
490
30 19
sb!
Non6
0 0-
0-
s7 97 22
s0 10
771 37 24 663 29
02715027
Frs Fre Fe Fr€e Sbp
-NN -Ndo
Stdage Len0b
Veh ln M€diil SEage,
#
7Sil185S
010130
Fre Fr* Fre Fre
'Nffi -N@ 00
682
00 972
684 056
07 s7 22 38 25
Shgo I
Sbge 2
Cdtdl Hd,ry
CribBl HdW SE I
cfi@l Hdtry sS 2
PolCaFl lran.M
Sbge I
sbgo 2
Plabonbl@ked,
%
Movc*t llaN6
MovC3p-2 Maneuver
Shge i
Shge2
SbSo I
Shge 2
c.&d |ktwy
Crft€l Hdq'SE
1 cdtel |Hwy Sb 2
Pol Cap-l M.Ma
Sbge 1
61r9e2
Piabon blek€d, o/
MdC+l MamM
SbSe
1 Slage
2 g8
4t;
2 218
,^-
7Itr 101 U2
243
414
436
110 317
2&
388
418
0.032
9.0 0_1
0.029
10'2B
0.1 c
HCM LOS
HCM Lane V,q Ratu
HCM cotd D6by {s)
HCM LaneLoS
HcM 05$ *fo o(v6t)
D
0.s7
263D
13 HCMLaneV[ Rato
tlCM Conbd D*y (5)
HCMLane LOS
tlcu 95h o,6lilG 0(v6h)
0 241
213c
0_0
Tdftc Study tor he Pacifrc Knolls Prejecl-N Exislng plus PrcjEt Slnchro 1 I Repdl Pdge I
TEffc Studyh Se PaciIc (nolls P.oject'PM ExbBng plus Proj$t Syndrc 11 ReFt Page
1 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
HCt\r 6th TWSC
1: Mutuhv Ave & Healdsburo Ave 06t1nt24
HCM 6th Tl /SC
l Mrrrnhv Ave & Hcrldeh'rrd Ava oil1n024
3.4 *00
972
814
lnl
Ianecnnfr0ilninns t \ t
Y
Tnib Vol shrl
confttno Pe&, #lt
sign Contol
RT oh{n€Imd
Sld.ge Lengh
V€h li Medbl Sh.t!e,
Crc&, K
P@l Hflt Fa6lc
I loly Vchiclca,
%
Mvmt Flfr
1t3
113
t9
sbp
Nqe
02719027
Fre Frce Free Fre Sbp -N@ -N@
23 645 4t
65 Tmllb Vd, wlft 900
FulurcVol,veffi 966
Coiiidu Pqb,#hr
0 Sign Conbol Fr*
RT ClDnmed
4t
41 Nq.
00 1000 3t 6l
55 1000 36 64
1802719
Free F@ Sbp Sbp
- Nffe - N06 0
0- 0
s7 97
22 37 60
42 A1
15X w
282
Sb0o I
Sbge 2
unt6lH&y
cdUBl Hdwy SE 1
Cdtal Hdi{y Sb2
PotCql MrnM
Sbge I
$qe2
Plabon bl@k€d, %
MoC*llra@w
Mov Cap.2 Maneuver
gbe I
Sbge 2
Slnm0clan0fr
VohhMedbnStEge,*
0 GE*.%
0 P&tHotrF..ir 97
karyVenrdes, %
2 MmlFb m
PoIC+t tlr@w
Sbge 1
Sblc I
Plabon bl@ked, '6 MdCe.lMalW
Sbgo 1
Slage
2 -125
0 0000
s7 9l 07 s1 s7
22222
57 21 06 fi 116
271
Shge 1
ShSe 2
Cril@l tldt,y
Crili€lHtuy Sb 1
Crijelltlw Sb2
s30
741
6.12 622
542
5.42 3518 3.318
106 316 g
471
4.12. 2.218 ,:
f02
97 S7 22
461
00 972
1031
Conflicfng 063
HCM IOS
Rato
HoM cotrtol D€hy (s)
HCMLaneLoS
HCM05h 9{d€ o(veh)
07 304
230
45 0.oil
103I
0.1 HCM LOS
0.593E
35 HCM LaneVrc Ratu 0496
HcMConfolDday(.) A82
HCM LaneLOS
E
Hoil05h9{ileQ(v6h) 2.6
Tnffc Shdy tuhe Pacifc(nolls Pojecl- M Future plus Prcjsl Syndo 1 1 ReFd tag! 1
Traffc Sludy ld lhe Padfrc KnolJsPrejst- PM Future plus Projsl SFdro 1 1 Repod P.!e
1 Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Appendix C
Queuing Calculations
Traffic Study for the Pacific Knolls Project
July2O24 @
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
rcl*ans
This page intentionalty left blank
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Maximum Queue Length
Two-Way Stop-Gontrolled I ntersections
Through Street:
Side Street:
Healdsburo Ave (SR 1 16)
Murphy Ave
Scenario: Future Dlus Proiect PM
Stop Controlled Legs North/South
Volume lnputs (veh/hr)
t
U)
o
oD (o
El)op
(u
o
I
rc
c
:
o
tt
-c
o
o
(r
-
Eastbound
0 Murphy Ave
64 t
a
c)
oD (o
l)
o
E
(!
OJ I
Maximum Queues (veh)
t
a
0)
o(o
l)
o
E
(E
c) I
'E
tr
=o
.oE
o
U'
t
a
o)
oD (o
l)6
E
t!o
-
Westbound
Eastbound
0 Murphy Ave
Eg
o
l)
.cE
o
z
3 Source: John T. Gard, ITE Journal, November 2001, "Estimating Maximum Queue Length at Unsignalized lntersections"
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024
Maximum Queue Length
Two-Way Stop-Control led I ntersections
Through Street: Healdsburg Ave (SR 1 1 6)
Side Street: MurohvAve
Scenario: Future plus Project AM
Stop Controlled Legs: Norlh/Soulh
Volume lnputs (veh/hr)
t
U)
I
o(o
=F -ct o
Il(uf
tcc
o
-o
-c
o
o
r+
Eastbound
F
0 Murphy Ave
113
t
U)
e
cD (o
.o
o
1t(!
o
I
Maximum Queues (veh)
t
m
o)
oD (o
-oop
(u
0, I
E' c
o
.o
.c
o
a
E.
U)
0)
ED (o
o
o
E
(E
{) r
Eastbound
Westbound
Murphy Ave
-t
o
tt
E
o
z
Source: John T. Gard, ITE Journal, November 2001 , "Estimating Maximum Queue Length at Unsignalized lntersections"
Agenda Item Number 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: November 5, 2024