CITY OF PETALUMA PETALUMA SMART RAIL STATION … · Page 1 of 40 February 28, 2013 CITY OF PETALUMA...

of 40 February 28, 2013

CITY OF PETALUMA PETALUMA SMART RAIL STATION AREAS: TOD MASTER PLAN

CEQA Environmental Checklist

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Project Title: Petaluma SMART Rail Station Areas: TOD

Master Plan, including the SmartCode Amendments (Appendix A)

Lead agency name and address: City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952

Contact person and phone number: Scott Duiven, (707) 778-4511 Project Location: Two SMART Station Areas:

Downtown Petaluma Station Area and Corona Road Station Area

Project sponsor’s name and address: City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952

General plan designation: Various Zoning: Various Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.)

The project includes a Master Plan for TOD development and SmartCode Amendments. The Master Plan incorporates an analysis of:

• Market demand; • Housing; • Access, connectivity, and parking; • Infrastructure; and • Historic preservation.

The Master Plan also includes a framework for public space, frontage types, building types, and phasing. Text amendments for the SmartCode are included as part of the project to facilitate plan implementation.

Surrounding land uses and setting; briefly describe the project’s surroundings:

The proposed Downtown Petaluma Station area is primarily surrounded by urban and industrial buildings. The proposed Corona Road Station area is bordered by rural land and low-density development outside the Urban Growth Boundary on the northeast and commercial and business park uses to the southwest.

Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financial approval, or participation agreements):


DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Introduction: This project is the Petaluma SMART Rail Station Areas: TOD Master Plan (“Master Plan”), a master plan for development of two areas within the City of Petaluma that are within the scope of the development evaluated in the Petaluma General Plan 2025 (“General Plan”), and its EIR which was certified on April 7, 2008. The General Plan and its EIR are available for review at the City of Petaluma, 11 English Street, in the Community Development Department, and are also available online at http://cityofpetaluma.net/cdd/index.html. This Initial Study incorporates the analysis of the General Plan EIR and adds information regarding any environmental effects that are different in kind or degree from those studied in the General Plan EIR. No Master Plan policies create new or more severe significant impacts than those disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Because CEQA discourages “repetitive discussions of the same issues” (CEQA Guidelines section 15152(b)) and allows limiting discussion of a later project which is consistent with a prior plan to impacts which were not examined as significant effects in a prior EIR or significant effects which could be reduced by revisions in the later project. (CEQA Guidelines section 15152(d).) No additional benefit to the environment or public purpose would be served by preparing an EIR merely to restate the analysis and significant and unavoidable effects found to remain after adoption of all General Plan policies/mitigation measures. All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the Master Plan. The General Plan’s significant and unavoidable impacts are recognized in this Initial Study, as are any Master Plan policies that affect or reduce the impacts. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan are:

• Increased motor vehicle traffic which would result in unacceptable level of service (LOS) at six intersections covered in the Master Plan:

o McDowell Boulevard North/Corona Road o Lakeville Street/Caulfield Lane o Lakeville Street/East D Street o Petaluma Boulevard South/D Street o Sonoma Mt. Parkway/Ely Boulevard South/East Washington Street o McDowell Boulevard North/Rainier Avenue

• Traffic related noise at General Plan buildout, which would result in a substantial increase in

existing exterior noise levels that are currently above City standards.

• Cumulative noise from proposed resumption of freight and passenger rail operations and possible resumption of intra-city trolley service, which would increase noise impacts.

• Air quality impacts resulting from General Plan buildout to population levels that could conflict with

the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy. (This regional air quality plan has since been replaced by the 2010 Clean Air Plan, discussed in the Initial Study Air Quality evaluation, Section 3.)

• A possible cumulatively considerable incremental contribution from General Plan development to

the significant impact of global climate change. The Master Plan, which includes the SmartCode Amendments in Appendix A, is funded through a grant received by the City of Petaluma from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Station Area Planning Program. The funding program seeks to maximize the potential for transit-oriented development and has driven the project to be a holistic, multidisciplinary planning effort that ensures that the Master Plan reflects “best practices” in planning transit-oriented development. SMART will provide an alternative to Highway 101, the only north-south transportation facility in Sonoma and Marin Counties, by implementing rail service with 14 proposed stations and a bicycle/pedestrian


pathway in the former Northwestern Pacific railroad corridor. Traffic congestion in the Highway 101 corridor has increased dramatically in the last decade and it is now ranked by Caltrans as one of the most congested freeways in the Bay Area. Commuter-oriented passenger train service will provide an estimated 14 round-trip trains per day, operating at 30-minute intervals in the morning and evening peak commuting hours during the week. SMART’s environmental studies project 5,000 to 6,000 passenger trips per day will be made on the train and 7,000 to 10,000 daily trips will be made on the bicycle/pedestrian pathway. SMART projects the rail project will take more than 1.4 million car trips off Highway 101 annually and reduce greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming, by at least 124,000 pounds per day. The Master Plan includes a discussion of opportunity sites, a description and illustrations of the preferred plan, alternative frameworks studied, a description of some of the key design elements used to promote the goals of the funding program, including walkability and livability, a phasing strategy, and a program for the Station Areas (addressing market demand, housing, connectivity, infrastructure, and historic preservation). Project Location and Setting: The Master Plan is proposed to guide development in two areas of the City, the Downtown Petaluma Station Area and the Corona Road Station Area. Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) has designated two station sites that will serve the SMART rail and trail project. The Master Plan areas are proposed for transit-oriented development that effectively capitalize on existing employment centers, commercial activities, and the complementary development of housing and additional job generating uses that would serve to support commuter rail. The Master Plan includes scenarios for future population growth within the City of Petaluma for use in the Master Plan area based on Petaluma’s increasing share of urban population in Sonoma County (see Table 1). The Master Plan’s market analysis and the population projections are derived from the adjusted state projections (which took into consideration that projections for Sonoma County and Petaluma were mostly proven incorrect by the most current Census). Based upon the foregoing, between 2010 and 2030 there should be an increase in households of between 5,400 and 6,400 households. These projections confirm that there will be a market for housing in the city.

Table 1. Petaluma Population Projections Based on Adjusted State Projections 2010 2020 2030 Change

(2010 to 2030) Population Low 57,941 63,220 69,466 11,525 Population High 57,941 64,303 71,865 13,924 Households Low 21,737 24,281 27,183 5,446 Household High 21,737 24,697 28,121 6,384 HH Size Trend 2.65 2.60 2.56 (0.096)

The Downtown Petaluma Station area includes the one half mile radius around the renovated historic rail depot adjacent to Lakeville Street and bounded by East Washington Street and East D Street. The area encompasses 636 acres. The Downtown Petaluma Station will provide easy access to the surrounding neighborhoods, downtown, Turning Basin, and regional transit connections. The long-term vision of the station area is that of a walkable extension of the existing downtown, with limited parking where the majority of the visitors arrive by transit, bicycle, walking, or water. The Corona Road Station Area is located in northwestern Petaluma in the vicinity of the intersection of Corona Road and North McDowell Boulevard and extending out a one half-mile radius from the station site. The area encompasses 674 acres. The Corona Road Station site will likely include a significant park-and-ride component while also benefiting from improved transit access to nearby employment, housing, community health services like the Petaluma Health Center, and student services like Santa Rosa Junior College. Construction of the Corona Road Station has been deferred by SMART to a second phase pending improved revenues.


Petaluma Station Area Master Plan: Rail Station Location Map


Downtown Petaluma Station Area Map


Corona Road Station Area Map


General Plan: The Petaluma General Plan 2025, adopted in 2008, serves the following purposes:

• Reflects a commitment on the part of the City Council and their appointed representatives and staff to carry out the Plan;

• Outlines a vision for Petaluma’s long-range physical and economic development and resource conservation; enhances the true quality of life for all residents and visitors; recognizes that all human activity takes place within the limits of the natural environment; and reflects the aspirations of the community;

• Provides strategies and specific implementing policies and programs that will allow this vision to be accomplished;

• Establishes a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with Plan policies and standards;

• Allows City departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance critical environmental resources, and minimize impacts and hazards; and

• Provides the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed plans and implementing programs, such as Development Codes, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), facilities and Master Plans, redevelopment projects, and the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).

The map below indicates the General Plan designated land uses within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area (1/2 mile from Station Parcel). The Station Area is approximately 636 acres, of which 447 acres are mapped with a designated land use (remaining 189 acres are composed primarily of Street ROW and Petaluma River). The primary designated land uses are Mixed Use (42%) Diverse Low Density Residential (24%), Public/Semi-Public (8%), and Medium Density Residential (7%). Within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area, there are also several designated industrial land uses (Industrial, Agricultural Support Industrial, and River Dependent Industrial) that together occupy 10% of the designated land use in the Downtown Petaluma Station Area. There are no proposed amendments to the General Plan to accommodate development in the Downtown Petaluma Station Area. Downtown Petaluma Station Area General Plan Land Use Designations


The map below indicates the land use within the Corona Road Station Area (1/2 mile from Station Parcel). The Station Area is approximately 674 acres, of which 408 is mapped with a land use (remaining 266 acres is composed primarily of area outside of the UGB, Street ROW, and Highway ROW). The primary land uses are Business Park (23%) Low Density Residential (20%), and Mobile Homes (14%). Outside of the area designated as Business Park, 13% of the site has a Commercial (Neighborhood or Community) or Mixed-Use designation. Forty-two percent has some form of residential designation, primarily low density. There are no proposed amendments to the General Plan to accommodate development in the Corona Road Station area. Corona Road Station Area General Plan Land Use Designations

General Plan 2025 EIR: The General Plan 2025 EIR was published in September 2007 (a revision was published to address Green House Gas impacts in November 2007). The Final EIR was published in February 2014 and certified on April 7, 2008. The General Plan EIR evaluates the potential impacts of the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025. The EIR identifies the SMART rail corridor and its potential to include two stations in Petaluma, at the historic Petaluma Depot and at Corona Road. Central Petaluma Specific Plan: The Central Petaluma Specific Plan (CPSP) addresses land use, density and intensity, transportation, and community character in the Central Petaluma area. The Central Petaluma area contains extensive vacant and underutilized parcels surrounding the Petaluma River and Turning Basin, a rail corridor with transit potential, and adjacent commercial and industrial uses. Adopted in June 2003, the CPSP calls for a mix of housing and activities within a walkable core area, a variety of transportation alternatives, and a working industrial waterfront along the river. Through the adoption of the CPSP, the City of Petaluma became the first City to adopt the SmartCode as a mandatory overlay. The SmartCode is a unified land development ordinance template for planning and urban design. It provides detailed regulations for development and new land uses within the Specific Plan area, and describes how these regulations will be used as part of the City’s development review process. The SmartCode is intended to ensure that all new buildings are harmonious with each other and with the character of Petaluma. The SmartCode is further intended to ensure that the area covered by the CPSP evolves into new, mixed-use neighborhoods with the following characteristics:


• The size of neighborhoods reflect a five-minute walking distance from edge to center (center meaning a railroad transit stop or the existing Downtown);

• The mixture of land uses includes shops, workplaces, residences, and civic buildings in proximity; • A variety of thoroughfares that serve the needs of the pedestrian, the cyclist and the automobile

equitably; • Public open spaces that provide places for informal social activity and recreation; and • Building frontages that define the public space of each street.

The following proposed amendments to the SmartCode are intended to ensure that the development within the Downtown Station area is consistent with the community’s vision and Master Plan . These amendments include:

• Refinements to address procedural issues in the existing document raised by staff, developers, and community members;

• Refinements to development standards that have been found to be impediments to development; • Expanded regulations to provide more certainty for the community and clarity for developers on

the type and form of new development; and • Refinements consistent with the updating of the SmartCode template from the version that was

adopted to the current version (v.9.2).

The following table lists the proposed amendments to the SmartCode document (revisions in Appendix A of the Master Plan). There are no changes to the allowable development densities and intensities established in the CPSP.

Table 2. Smart Code Amendments Introduction

Intent Provide an expanded Intent that combines the purpose included in the existing SmartCode and the intent in Version 9.2 of the SmartCode. The expanded Intent will provide criteria used to rule on requests for Warrants.

Section 2 – Zoning Map Table 2.1 Transect Zone

Descriptions [new]

Version 9.2 of the SmartCode includes a table that provides descriptions of the character of each zone (Table 1). A version of this table that has been calibrated for Petaluma has been added to the SmartCode.

2.10

Zoning Map

Provide a refined zoning map that shows a reduced amount of T6 required in the station area. After analyzing market demand data, see Chapter 3 (Market Demand), it was determined that the ground floor retail and density required by T6 was more than the market could support. The updated zoning should focus T6 into areas that are most appropriate for ground floor retail and higher densities.

Section 3 – Building Function Standards3.10.030

Permit Requirements for Allowable Uses

[new]

Introduce a Minor Use Permit (MUP). The minor use permit enables administrative review of uses that are generally compatible with the allowed uses in that zone, but may have minor components of that use that require an administrative review and/or conditions of approval to ensure there are no conflicts with surrounding uses. The Minor Use Permit provides an intermediate, administrative level of review that ensures consistency with the community’s vision without adding the time and cost associate with a full Use Permit to uses that are generally compatible.

Table 3.1 Allowed Functions and

Permit Requirements

Update table to include Minor Use Permits.

Table 3.1 Allowed Functions and

Permit Requirements

Update table to include T6-Open to allow for ground floor office and service uses.


Table 2. Smart Code Amendments Table 4.1 Urban Standards

Table Update the Urban Standards Table consistent with the vision for the Downtown Station Area: • Eliminate Density Maximums - Rely on Form-Based Standards to regulate development. Density requirements could discourage smaller units near transit. • Add Thoroughfares / Public Frontage Types to the table (consistent with SmartCode v.9.2). • Refine List of Civic Space Types to be consistent with revised Civic Space Standards. • Eliminate Lot Area and Lot Coverage Requirements for T5 and T6. Lot Area and Lot Coverage for T5 and T6 should be more precisely regulated by building type. • Add Build-to Line standards for T6 to ensure that all buildings are placed at back of sidewalk and there is a consistent facade plane. • Revise Setbacks, create separate regulations for Principal Building and Outbuilding, rear setbacks along alleys to 0’. • Add allowed Building Types. • Add Private Frontages. • Revise height limits. Allow 6 stories max. in T6; allow T5 to have height bonus to 6 stories. • Add regulations for Ground Floor Height, Ground Floor Depth, and Distance Between Entries. • Revise parking standards. 1 space per market rate unit; .5 space per affordable unit; 1 space per room for lodging uses; 2.0 spaces per 1000 sq. ft for all other uses.

4.20.010 Bldg Height Bonus Change exception to apply to T5. 4.30 Building Placement Update the Building Placement Table with the Building Disposition Table

(Table 9) from the SmartCode v.9.2 that has been calibrated for Petaluma. 4.30 Frontage Types Provide expanded Private Frontage Standards that includes regulations for

each frontage type. Figure 4.4 Frontage Type

Regulating Plan [new]

Add frontage type Regulating Plan indicating where specific frontage types are required or allowed.

4.5 Civic Spaces Provide expanded Private Civic Space Standards that include additional regulations as well as smaller open spaces appropriate for urban location.

Figure 4.5 Civic Space Regulating Plan

[new]

Add Civic Space Regulating Plan that provides additional dimensional requirements.

4.70.020 Live/Work Units Revise standards to reflect intended live/work types and ensure easy approval.

4.70.030 Mixed-Use Revise standards to reflect intended mixed-use types and address community concerns about industrial uses and noise.

4.80 Building Type Standards [new]

Introduce Building Type Standards to provide additional guidance for the development of specific Building Types.

4.90 Commercial Signage Standards [new]

Introduce Commercial Signage Standards to provide additional guidance for the development of specific Building Types.

5.10.030 Thoroughfare Design [new] Provide additional standards related to thoroughfare design.

5.10.040 Movement Type and Design Speed [new] Provide descriptions of the Movement Type and Design Speed.

5.10.050 Intersections [new] Add regulations to address intersections. 5.10.060 Public Frontages

[new] Add regulations to address public frontages.

5.10.070 Thoroughfare Assemblies [new]

Add the additional thoroughfare Assemblies to the catalogue of existing thoroughfare assemblies.

5.10 Thoroughfare Standards Key Map Update the thoroughfare standards key map for the Station Area.


Section 6 – Parking Standards 6.10.070 Sunset Clause:

Establishment of Civic Parking Infrastructure

Update Sunset Clause. Allow waiving of all parking standards should the city adopt a policy targeting a parking availability of 15% for on-street parking spaces on each block face and parking is managed to achieve this supply goal through the use of permits, time-limits, pricing, or a combination thereof.

Section 8 – Code Administration 8.10.020 Warrant or Variance

Procedures [new] Provide a procedure for Warrants and Variances.

8.10.030 Limited Time Permits

Update the list of allowed temporary uses to include retail incubator structures and increase the limit of duration for these structures to up to 3 years with required yearly renewal.

8.10.060 Minor Use Permit [new] Provide an administrative procedure for a Minor Use Permit.

Section 9 – Glossary 9.10.020 Definitions Update illustrated definitions with illustrations from SmartCode v.9.2. 9.10.020 Definitions Provide additional definitions related to mixed-use addressing:

• River Industrial • Agricultural Industrial • Primary Use • Accessory use • Live/Work and Work/Live • Hours of Operation (provide distinction between business hours and hours during which machinery is operational)

Source: Table 8.3: SmartCode Amendments, Petaluma Station Area Master Plan Final Draft January 2013, Page 8-12.

Central Petaluma Specific Plan EIR: The Central Petaluma Specific Plan EIR (CPSP EIR) was published in March 2003. The Final EIR was published in April 2003 and certified on June 2, 2003. The General Plan EIR evaluates the potential impacts of the Central Petaluma Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Petaluma is located in southwestern Sonoma County along the 101 corridor approximately 15 miles south of Santa Rosa and 20 miles north of San Rafael. Situated at the northernmost navigable end of the Petaluma River, a tidal estuary that snakes southward to San Pablo Bay, Petaluma’s boundaries are defined by the surrounding landscape. The City originated along the banks of the Petaluma River, spreading outward over the floor of the Petaluma River Valley as the City grew. The Valley itself is defined by Sonoma Mountain on the northeast and by the hills extending northward from Burdell Mountain on the west. To the south are the Petaluma Marshlands and beyond, the San Francisco Bay. Petaluma’s Urban Growth Boundary encompasses approximately 9,911 acres. The Downtown Petaluma Station area encompasses a number of valuable historic and cultural resources, and is bisected by the Petaluma River, an important navigational, recreational, industrial, and visual asset to the downtown area. The Corona Road Station area, in contrast to the Downtown Station’s historic urban-industrial context, conveys a strong rural character. A large proportion of the area to the north of the proposed Corona Road Station site is outside the Urban Growth Boundary and intended to stay preserved as rural land in the foreseeable future; where developed, the Corona Road area maintains lower density forms in comparison to the Downtown area.


ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED

None of the following environmental factors would be potentially affected by this project. The environmental factors below are discussed in this document.

1. Aesthetics 2. Agricultural & Forestry Resources

3. Air Quality

4. Biological Resources 5. Cultural Resources 6. Geology / Soils

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

8. Hazards & Hazardous Materials

9. Hydrology / Water Quality

10. Land Use / Planning 11. Mineral Resources 12. Noise

13. Population / Housing

14. Public Services 15. Recreation

16. Transportation / Traffic 17. Utilities / Service Systems 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

X

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

_______________________________ _______________ Signature Date _______________________________ _______________ Signature Date


1. AESTHETICS: Would the project:

Potentially Significant

Impact

Less ThanSignificant

with Mitigation

Incorporated

Less than Significant

Impact

No Impact

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

Aesthetics Setting Aesthetic and visual resources in the Master Plan Areas include views of the Sonoma Mountains, hills, and agricultural land, natural elements including the Petaluma River, Corona Creek, and landscapes, and elements of the built environment including historic structures, unique homes and architecture, and rural agricultural support structures. Aesthetics Impact Discussion:

1(a). No Impact: The Master Plan implements the City of Petaluma’s General Plan 2025 (General Plan) and the 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan (CPSP). The General Plan contains numerous policies regarding the preservation of scenic roads and highways. No impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated, and thus the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 1(b-c). No Impact: The Master Plan implements the General Plan and CPSP. Impacts from future growth have been previously identified in the General Plan EIR. Future development would be required to be consistent with existing adopted General Plan policies that protect the scenic resources of the City of Petaluma. Implementation of the Master Plan proposes to enhance visual character by creating visual interest in the public space framework that draws the pedestrian from one location to the next. No impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated, and thus the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 1(d). No Impact: The Master Plan implements the General Plan and CPSP. Petaluma’s Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) § 21.040.D specifies lighting standards for all new exterior lighting. Prior to approval of any new projects within the City requiring a Conditional Use Permit or Design Review approval, the City shall conduct project-specific environmental review to determine whether the project would cause any significant impacts and, where possible, to mitigate potential environmental impacts. In addition, any proposed project would have to conform to any applicable design standards and any adopted local or State codes that regulate public health and safety such as the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, or Mechanical Codes. No impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated, and thus the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment.


2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of statewide importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

X

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

X

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

X

d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

X

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

X

Agricultural Setting Agricultural lands, located in the northern tip of the city, comprise approximately 77 acres, less than one percent of the land within the Petaluma Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). There are no forest lands, farmlands or agricultural resources located within the Master Plan areas. Agricultural Resources Impact Discussion:

2(a-e). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in impacts to farmland or agricultural uses located within the City of Petaluma. The Master Plan implements the General Plan and CPSP. Impacts from future growth have been previously identified in the General Plan EIR. Sites for future


development are zoned appropriately; most development will be as urban infill, no land in the Master Plan areas are designated important farmlands. No impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR are anticipated, and thus the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. In 2010 the City Council placed a ballot measure before the voters extending the UGB to 2025.

3. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the air quality management district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

X

b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

X

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

X

d. Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations (emissions from direct, indirect, mobile and stationary sources)?

X

e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

X

Air Quality Setting According to the Petaluma General Plan EIR (Air Quality – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Section), vehicle emissions were the greatest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions (59 percent), which is discussed further under Section 7 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions). Air quality in both study areas is affected by vehicular traffic as well as emissions from natural gas and energy use in buildings. Downtown Petaluma Station Area air quality may also be affected by nearby industrial activities, and agricultural operations may impact air quality in the Corona Road station area, potentially contributing to dust and chemicals in the air. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan related to air quality are:

• Air quality impacts resulting from General Plan buildout to population levels that could conflict with the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy. (This regional air quality plan has since been replaced by the 2010 Clean Air Plan, discussed below.)

All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the Master Plan. Air Quality Impact Discussion: 3(a). No Impact: The City of Petaluma is located in the Bay Area Air Basin and is within the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The BAAQMD is charged with implementing regulations and programs to reduce air pollution and assist the Bay Area in reaching all outdoor air quality standards. The BAAQMD operates an air quality monitoring station in downtown Santa Rosa at 5th Street, approximately 15 miles north of Petaluma. The BAAQMD Compliance and Enforcement Division


routinely conducts inspections and audits of potential polluting sites to ensure compliance with applicable federal, State, and BAAQMD regulations. The 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy and the 2010 Bay Area Clean Air Plan contain district wide control measures to reduce ozone precursor and carbon monoxide emissions. The 2005 Ozone Strategy was based on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) employment and populations projections for 2003. General plans that are consistent with ABAG projections are considered consistent with the growth projections of the adopted air quality plan. At the time of adoption, the City’s General Plan was not in conformance with the population projections of the 2005 Ozone Strategy. BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan (CAP) in September 2010. The 2010 CAP serves to update the Bay Area ozone plan in compliance with the requirements of the Chapter 10 of the California Health & Safety Code. As stated above, general plans that are consistent with the projections of employment and population forecasts used in the CAP are considered consistent with the growth projections of the adopted air quality plan. However, the City’s General Plan is not in compliance with the new 2010 CAP. The population projections are less than the City’s General Plan. Air quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the General Plan. No new or increased impact beyond what is already anticipated in the 2008 General Plan as a result of the Master Plan. 3(b-c). No Impact: In 1998, the Bay Area recorded excesses of the national one-hour standard on 8 days and excesses of the state standard on 29 days. In 2000, excesses of the national one-hour ozone standard were recorded on 3 days and excesses of the State standard were recorded on 12 days. To comply with state air quality standards for ozone, BAAQMD prepared the Clean Air Plan for the Bay Area in 1991 and that plan has been updated every three years since, with the latest update in 2010. The Master Plan does not propose any additional development not anticipated by the 2008 General Plan. Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself violate any air quality standard or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. The Master Plan will be implementing transit-oriented development, which by its very nature is projected to reduce overall vehicles trips, therefore having a positive impact or air quality be reducing vehicle emissions. Air quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the 2008 General Plan. 3(d). No Impact: The Master Plan has identified sites in the planning areas where infill could occur, but does not propose any site-specific new development. Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No new or increased impact as a result of the Master Plan will result beyond what is already anticipated in the 2008 General Plan and 2003 CPSP. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to air quality, pollutant concentrations, and sensitive receptor exposure. 3(e). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. No new or increased impact as a result of the Master Plan will result beyond what is already anticipated in the 2008 General Plan and CPSP.

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

X


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

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?

X

Biological Resources Impact Discussion:

4(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a threatened, endangered, candidate, sensitive, or special status. The General Plan EIR states that occurrences of several plant and animal species with special-status have been recorded or are suspected to occur in the Sonoma County area and the Petaluma vicinity. Several of these species have been reported in the City, and most of these are associated with the Petaluma River and its tributaries. A number of the natural communities in the City also have a high inventory priority with the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) due to rarity and threats, and are considered sensitive resources. Section 4.1, Biology and Natural Resources, in Chapter 4 (The Natural Environment) of the General Plan focuses on habitat protection in order to protect threatened, endangered, candidate, sensitive, or special status species through numerous goals, policies, and programs. Impacts on such species either directly or through habitat modifications resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. No new or increased impacts as a result of the Master Plan will result above what is already anticipated in the General Plan and CPSP. The level and significance of environmental impacts resulting from future development projects will be further assessed in accordance with CEQA, as necessary. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to any biological resources identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. 4(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself have a substantial effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. The goals and policies in Section 4.1 (Biology and Natural Resources) of the General Plan would serve to protect wetlands, habitat for special-status species, native vegetation, wildlife habitat, and wildlife movement corridors. Additional biological and wetland assessments would be required as part of environmental review of proposed developments, as called for in Program 4-P-3.A of the General Plan. Where sensitive resources are encountered, adequate mitigation would be required through avoidance, minimization, on-site mitigation and off-site mitigation as called for in policies and programs in the General Plan. Impacts to any riparian habitat or other sensitive


natural communities resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. No new or increased impacts will result from adopting the Master Plan beyond those already anticipated in the General Plan and CPSP. 4(c). No Impact: The City of Petaluma has wetlands listed in the National Wetland inventory, which include: fresh emergent wetlands in the southern portion of the Petaluma River and Northern coastal salt marsh wetland and brackish marsh wetland in the lower reaches of the Petaluma River. Figure 3.8-1 (Habitat Areas and Special Status Species) in the General Plan EIR shows no wetlands in the two Master Plan areas. For protection of land adjacent to the Petaluma River and its tributaries Section 4.1 (Biology and Natural Resources) of the General Plan and the Implementing Zoning Ordinance have measures that protect waterways. Since no impacts to biological resources are anticipated beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR, no mitigation measures are proposed. Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself have a substantial effect on any federally protected wetlands. 4(d). No Impact: All impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development within the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR concluded that development within the City’s urban growth boundary would not interfere with the movement of fish or other wildlife species that migrate through the already urbanized areas of the City. Adopting the Master Plan will not result in new or increased impacts beyond those already anticipated in the 2008 General Plan. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to any wildlife species. 4(e). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Local policies and ordinances designed to protect biological resources were drafted in response to identified environmental impacts at full build-out as discussed in the EIR for the City of Petaluma General Plan. Adopting the Master Plan will not change or conflict with any of the existing local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. 4(f). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not conflict with any approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan or with Section 4.1 (Biology and Natural Resources) of the General Plan. Section 4.1 (Biology and Natural Resources) addresses development impacts to plant and animal habitat. Future development within the City will be subject to the policies of the Biology and Natural Resources section and environmental review as required by CEQA.

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?

X

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?

X

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

X

d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

X

Cultural Resources Setting: As noted in the General Plan, Petaluma has over 300 properties of potential historic significance, a number of which are located within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area. The Coast Miwok Indians


resided in southern Sonoma County, and Petaluma was originally the name of a Miwok village east of the Petaluma River. Early settlers from the eastern United States flocked to the City in the mid 1800s after the discovery of gold. Historic resources within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area include the train depot, residential neighborhoods, pedestrian and vehicular bridges, and an abundance of commercial and industrial structures. A significant portion of the Downtown commercial core is located within the Petaluma Historic Commercial District, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Downtown Petaluma Station Area development is designed to protect and complement historic districts and structures. The Master Plan notes that historic resources are central to Petaluma culture and contribute greatly to the aesthetic quality and character of the downtown. The Historic Preservation Chapter of the General Plan includes policies and programs to protect the City’s historic and cultural resources throughout the City. In addition to those in the General Plan, the Master Plan includes recommendations for additional historic preservation efforts, and potential funding sources to implement recommendations. Cultural Resources Impact Discussion: 5(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource within the City of Petaluma. Impacts on historical resources resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the Master Plan areas or from the removal, modification or demolition of existing residences were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. While the General Plan has an extensive list of policies and programs for historic preservation, the Master Plan includes recommendations that focus on the top priorities and concerns specific to the Master Plan areas. Additionally, the standards from Section 7 (Historic Resources Conservation & Preservation) of the Smart Code establishes regulations for the protection of culturally and/or historically significant sites and structures in the Master Plan area. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review, development standards and compliance with all applicable policies related to any historical resources. 5(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. Existing General Plan policies related to archaeological resources will continue to apply to future development projects. Impacts associated with archaeological resources resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures were integrated into the 2008 General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Adopting the Master Plan will not result in new or increased impacts on archaeological resources not anticipated in the General Plan or CPSP. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to any archaeological resources. 5(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. No site-specific development is proposed as a result of Master Plan implementation. Impacts associated with paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures were integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to any unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. 5(d). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Impact on human remains resulting from the anticipated growth and


development of the City or from the removal, modification or demolition of existing residential units were addressed in the EIR for the Petaluma General Plan. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to human remains or other cultural resources.

Geology and Soils Setting Within Petaluma, the most significant geologic hazards relating to the Master Plan areas are those associated with liquefaction, expansive soils, and ground shaking during earthquakes. Other geologic hazards include the potential for expansive soils and soil erosion. The City of Petaluma lies within a seismically active region. The principal faults in the area are capable of generating large earthquakes that could produce strong to violent ground shaking in Petaluma. No active faults run directly through the City, however the City is less than 5 miles northeast of the Rodgers Creek Fault. The traces of the Rodgers Creek closest to the City are not historically active (within the last 200 years), but show evidence of activity during the last 11,000 years, a relatively short time in terms of geologic activity. Within Petaluma, the areas most at risk from liquefaction are along the Petaluma River. Figure 3.7-5 of the 2008 General Plan shows areas with potential liquefaction hazard. Although liquefaction often causes severe damage to structures, structural collapse is uncommon. The risk to public safety from liquefaction, therefore, is relatively low. Structures can be protected from liquefaction through the use of special

6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:


Impact

Less Than Significant

with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Publication 42)

X

ii) Strong Seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including

liquefaction? X

iv) Landslides? X

b. Result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is

unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

X

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

X

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

X


foundations. The City’s Building Code requires that each construction site suspected of containing liquefaction-prone soils be investigated and the soils be treated to eliminate the hazard. Expansive soils are significant geologic hazards in the City. Expansive soil materials occur in the substrate of the clays and clayey loams in the City. Buildings, utilities and roads can be damaged by expansive soils and the gradual cracking, settling, and weakening of older buildings in the City has created significant safety concerns and financial loss. To reduce the risks associated with expansive soils, the City’s Building Code requires that each construction site suspected of containing expansive soils be investigated and the soils be treated to eliminate the hazard. Soil erosion is a geologic hazard in relationship to construction activity within the City. Soil erosion is naturally occurring process. The agents of soil erosion are water and wind, each contributing a significant amount of soil loss. The effects of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope, the narrowing of runoff channels, and by the removal of groundcover. When completed, surface improvements, such as buildings and paved roads, decrease the potential for erosion onsite, but can increase the rate and volume of runoff, potentially causing off-site erosion. If unmitigated, eroding soil can clog drainages and cause flooding, slope instability, and additional erosion by diverting water flow. To reduce the risks associated with erosion, the City’s Building Code requires that the grading of each construction site be planned and implemented to eliminate the hazard. The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process is instrumental in this effort (see Section 3.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the General Plan EIR). Geology and Soils Impact Discussion: 6(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides. Impacts to persons and property associated with seismic activity resulting from full build-out of the General Plan were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures applicable to future development projects will reduce the severity of potential impacts. Conformance with standard Uniform Building Code Guidelines would also minimize potential impacts from seismic shaking. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and geotechnical evaluation. 6(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Impacts to soils resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. No new or increased impact will result above what is already anticipated in the existing environmental documents as a result of adopting the Master Plan. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to erosion. 6(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan itself will not cause structures to be subject to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. Geologic impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures applicable to future development projects will reduce the severity of potential impacts. In addition, new development would be subject to the City’s Implementation Zoning Ordinance related to grading, erosion, and sediment control. No new or increased impacts will result above what is already anticipated in the existing environmental documents. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction and collapse. 6(d). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan itself will not cause development to occur on expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property. Standard measures integrated into the 2008 General Plan in


the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures applicable to future development projects will reduce the severity of potential impacts. No new or increased impacts will result above what is already anticipated in the General Plan EIR as a result of adopting the Master Plan. Furthermore, any development as a result of the Master Plan would be subject to all existing City development standards and will be subject to further environmental review and soils analysis. 6(e). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan itself will not cause development to occur on soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The Master Plan areas are located within the City limits in urbanized locations where adequate sewer facilities are available. Impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures applicable to future development projects will reduce the severity of potential impacts. No new or increased impacts will result beyond those already anticipated in the existing environmental documents as a result of adopting the Master Plan. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to soils incapable of supporting wastewater disposal.

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

X

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

X

Setting The potential effect of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on global climate change is an emerging issue that warrants discussion under CEQA. Unlike the pollutants discussed above (Section 3. Air Quality) that may have regional and/or local effects, project-generated GHG emissions do not directly produce local or regional impacts, but may contribute to an impact on global climate change. While individual projects contribute relatively small amounts of GHG, when added to all other GHG producing activities around the world, they may result in global increases in these emissions. In addition, local or regional environmental effects may occur if the climate is changed. Therefore, a project produces an indirect localized and regional environmental impact from its contribution of GHG and the subsequent change in global climate. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan related to green house gas emissions are:

• A possible cumulatively considerable incremental contribution from General Plan development to the significant impact of global climate change.

All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the Master Plan. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Discussion: 7(a-b). No Impact: The California legislature passed Assembly Bill 32 in 2006, requiring that the State reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. An enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions was initiated in 2012. In addition, Senate Bill 375 seeks to curb GHGs by reducing urban sprawl and vehicle miles traveled. In response to these legislative actions, the City of Petaluma is


currently preparing a Climate Action Plan in partnership with the County and other local jurisdictions which will implement General Plan Policy 4-P-27 “…prepare a Community Climate Action Plan to identify and prioritize programs, projects, and procedural policies that will help the City achieve the community greenhouse gas emission goals of Resolution 2005-118 (25% below 1990 levels by 2015)”. Similar to the greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan identified by the California Attorney General, the Climate Action Plan will quantify community-wide emissions for 1990 (per Resolution 2005-118) and identify programs for reducing emissions by 2020. In 2007, the City prepared a revised Air Quality section for the General Plan EIR to address greenhouse gas emissions. Appendix A of the 2007 Revised EIR includes all of the applicable policies from the General Plan that significantly reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. One of these policies (Policy 3-P-97) directly identifies a component of this project: “work with regional and other agencies to create a new rail transit station near Corona Road with high-intensity, transit-oriented development.” SMART projects the rail project will take more than 1.4 million car trips off Highway 101 annually and reduce greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming, by at least 124,000 pounds per day. The implementation of the Master Plan and SmartCode Amendments would not result in conflict with plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable strategies and implementation actions adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Plan-related impacts would be less than significant.

8. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

X


h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

X

Hazards/Hazardous Materials Impact Discussion: 8(a-g). No Impact: The Master Plan is a policy and regulatory document and does not propose any physical development activity, therefore it will not result in creation or emission of hazardous materials. Regulations related to hazardous materials and waste are implemented by a number of governmental agencies that have established regulations regarding the proper transportation, handling, management, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials for specific operations and activities. Pursuant to CEQA, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTCS) maintains a hazardous-waste and substances sites list (Cortese List). There are no Cortese sites within the City of Petaluma. The Project is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan or within the vicinity of a private air strip. In addition, the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Any project proposed in the City would have to conform to any applicable adopted local or State codes that regulate public health and safety, such as the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, or Mechanical Codes. Therefore, adoption of the Master Plan would not result in a significant impact. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to hazards or hazardous material. 8(h). No Impact: Downtown Petaluma Station area is predominantly commercial and industrial, with very little open space, therefore posing minimal potential fire safety problems. The Corona Station area is suburban in nature with more open space, posing potential fire safety problems. Impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures applicable to future development projects will reduce the severity of potential impacts. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY:

Would the project:


Impact

Less Than Significant

with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

X

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

X

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

X

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

X


in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the

capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

X

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as

mapped on a federal flood hazard boundary or flood insurance rate map or other flood hazard delineation map?

X

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows?

X

i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

X

j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Hydrology and Water Quality Setting: Petaluma River The Petaluma River is central to the Downtown Petaluma Station Area and runs through the southwest portion of the Corona Road Station Area, south of Highway 101. The portions of the river within the study areas are part of the lower reaches of the Petaluma watershed (an area of approximately 46 square miles). The river continues to the southeast of Petaluma and flows directly into San Pablo Bay. The Petaluma River is used for recreational boating and water sports as well as long-standing river-dependent industrial operations. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) dredges the river on a four-year cycle to maintain navigability for commercial shipping. In order to ensure continued dredging services from the USACE, there must be an “economically justifiable” tonnage of commercial products moved on the river, as determined by the USACE. Dredging is vital not only to commercial operations, but also to recreational boating and flood control. While the General Plan suggests potential alternative sources to fund dredging operations, such as the establishment of an assessment district, the continued accommodation of industrial uses on the waterfront remains an important land use consideration. The Petaluma River and Turning Basin within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area are central to the identity of the City’s downtown and are a key factor in the SMART station’s connection to the City’s historic urban core. New developments proposed under the Master Plan are encouraged to engage and activate the waterfront, preserve existing river-dependent uses, feature the river as an integral component of design and orientation, and enhance public access to the riverfront. Corona Creek Corona Creek is a tributary to the Petaluma River that runs from the northeast to southwest through the Corona Road Station study area. The creek bisects suburban residential development throughout much of the study area and serves as public open space, including a bicycle and pedestrian trail. Flooding The Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) prepared in 2008 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) identify areas in Petaluma subject to flooding during a 100-year storm. The flood zones are identified in Figures 3.6-3 and 3.6-4 in General Plan EIR. A “100-year storm” means that in any year there is one chance out of 100 for a serious flood to occur. There are several areas in and around the Master Plan areas that historically have experienced significant flooding, including areas adjacent to the Petaluma River and Willow Brook Creek upstream of Corona Road.


Water Supply Based on the General Plan EIR and a recent update of water supply and demand for the City’s 2010 Updated Urban Water Management Plan adopted on June 6, 2011 (UWMP), adequate water is available to serve the Master Plan. In addition, the Sonoma County Water Agency adopted its 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (Brown & Caldwell June 2011) on June 21, 2011. A copy of that Plan is available online at http://www.scwa.ca.gov/uwmp/. At page 1-8, and in Section 4.1-2, the Plan confirms the conclusion that neither the 2008 National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Opinion nor reasonably anticipated changes to it will affect the Water Agency’s ability to deliver the quantities of water from its transmission system projected in its Plan. The General Plan EIR relied on the General Plan 2025 Water Demand and Supply Analysis (Dodson, July 2006, Technical Appendix, Vol. 2) and other referenced information to conclude that sufficient water supplies will be available to serve the City through General Plan buildout in 2025. The City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) updated information from General Plan 2025 background and environmental documents and extended the term of water demand analysis to 2035. The UWMP’s updated analysis found, given the total estimated future population, land use, and estimated water demand, the City's existing water supply contract with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), and planned City water recycling and water conservation programs, that sufficient water is available for long-range development through 2035. The 2010 UWMP was found to be internally consistent with the General Plan 2025. In evaluating the reasonable likelihood that sufficient water supply is available for this Master Plan, the City has compared General Plan 2025 projected demand to actual use through December 2012. The results of that comparison are discussed below and show that potable water demand is well within the available SCWA supply, both for this project, and for cumulative demand some ten years beyond the General Plan 2025 buildout scenario used for cumulative impact analysis in the DEIR. General Plan 2025 Demand Monitoring General Plan 2025 Policy 8-P-4 provides in part as follows: The City shall routinely assess its ability to meet demand for potable water.

A. The City shall continue to monitor the demand for water for projected growth against actual use, and ensure that adequate water supply is in place prior to, or in conjunction with, project entitlements.

B. The City planning staff will discuss water supply with the developer for each new development early in the planning process and inform Water Resources staff of upcoming demands as provided by the applicant.

C. The City shall maintain a tiered development record to monitor approved and pending project

developments to allow a reasonable forecast of projected water demand. The 2010 Urban Water Management Plan updated the General Plan 2025 water analysis and further refined a water supply program that relies upon water from SCWA, recycled water (potable offset), and conservation. As noted in General Plan 2025 Policies 8-P-5-C and 8-P-19, the City also anticipated continuing use of groundwater to meet emergency needs and to offset peak demands. Per Policy 8-P-4 of the Petaluma General Plan 2025, City staff is required to monitor actual demand for potable water in comparison to the supply and demand projections in the 2006 Water Supply and Demand Analysis Report. Staff has compared actual demand for potable water to an annual SCWA supply limit for Petaluma of 4,366 million gallons per year (13,400 acre-feet) and a peak supply limit of 21.8 million gallons per day. In both instances, potable demand is well within available SCWA supply capacity. Tiered


water rates, conservation efforts, and the conversion of Rooster Run Golf Course to recycled water have kept annual and peak demands within the available SCWA supply at approximately 2,972 million gallons per year and an average day maximum month peak demand of 11.5 million gallons per day, respectively, in 2012. Use through December 2010, exhibited a downward trend in consumption since 2008, reflecting significantly increased water conservation during the peak summer months. In the past two years consumption has resumed an upward trend. Staff has also reviewed the projected demand of entitled projects and proposed projects compared to available supply as of December 31, 2012. Entitled projects are defined as approved projects that are either under construction or yet to be constructed. Proposed projects are those projects, which are undergoing discretionary review or have been proposed as of December 31, 2012. When all proposed projects are added to the actual demand for 2012, resulting aggregate demand of 3,190 million gallons per year and average day maximum month peak demand of 12.42 million gallons per day remains well within the available SCWA supply of 4,366 million gallons per year and peak supply of 21.8 million gallons per day evaluated in the General Plan 2025 and the 2010 UWMP. Long term supply for buildout relies on the continued implementation of various phases of the City's recycled water program and water conservation programs to offset potable water use. Those programs are analyzed in the General Plan 2025 and 2010 UWMP with estimated dates for implementation dependent upon demand. The General Plan 2025 monitoring policies outlined above will continue to track the contribution of these programs to the supply and demand balance. General Plan Policy 8-P-4.A is a further limitation on approval of development and requires an adequate water supply to be in place at the time of any future project entitlement. Projects within the Master Plan will be subject to Chapter 15.17 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, the Water Conservation Regulations Ordinance, which contains water efficiency standards for all installed water using fixtures, appliances, irrigation systems, and any other water using devices to ensure that water is used as efficiently as possible throughout new development projects. Chapter 15.17 also provides enforcement mechanisms and penalties for water waste, up to and including shut off of water service. Hydrology and Water Quality Impact Discussion: 9(a,b and f). No Impact: As a policy and regulatory document, implementation of the Master Plan will not result in the depleting, degrading or altering of ground water supplies. The City has adequate water supply resources to accommodate development of the City in compliance with the build-out projection established in the General Plan. 9(c). No Impact: As a policy and regulatory document, implementation of the Master Plan will not result in alteration of the existing drainage patterns as it does not call for any specific development projects. Erosion or siltation resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce the severity of potential impacts. No new or increased impacts as a result of the Master Plan will result beyond what is already anticipated in the existing environmental documents. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to drainage patterns and erosion or siltation. 9(d). No Impact: As a policy and regulatory document, implementation of the Master Plan will not alter existing drainage patterns in a manner that would result in substantial alteration of drainage patterns or increases in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding. Impacts on drainage patterns and surface runoff from the anticipated growth and development in the City have been addressed in the Petaluma General Plan EIR. Standard measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce the severity of potential impacts. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject


to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to drainage patterns and surface runoff. 9(e). No Impact: As a policy and regulatory document, implementation of the Master Plan will not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. With new Low Impact Development (LID) requirements, the storm water runoff coming from developed sites may be required to mimic pre-developed conditions. Therefore, upsizing of storm drain mains may not be required with development. However, LID also requires water quality treatment of runoff coming from impervious surfaces. While on-site building improvements will treat and possibly detain runoff from building roofs, specialty storm water inlets with treatment components will need to be installed to handle runoff from streets and sidewalks. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with applicable policies and regulations related to erosion and stormwater run-off. 9(g-j). No Impact: The General Plan indicates that the Master Plan areas are located within a 100-year flood hazard area. The policies of the General Plan reduce impacts from flooding through the establishment of the Petaluma River Corridor (PRC). The PRC is set aside for the design and construction of a flood terrace system to allow the River to accommodate a 100-year storm event within a modified River channel. The General Plan also includes policies to implement the Petaluma River Watershed Master Drainage Plan. Impacts from potential flooding have been addressed in the General Plan EIR. As a policy and regulatory document, implementation of the Master Plan will not involve the exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow. The sites identified for potential residential development in the Master Plan could be located within a 100- year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. The City of Petaluma General Plan has in place several policies that avoid flood hazards. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies and regulations regarding flood protection, hydrology, and water quality.

10. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or

regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

X

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

X

Land Use and Planning Impact Discussion: 10(a). No Impact: The Master Plan will not divide an established community. It is consistent with the General Plan and other applicable City land use plans. 10(b-c). No Impact: The Master Plan is consistent with all relevant documents and plans that regulate land use, particularly the General Plan, Implementing Zoning Ordinance, and CPSP. Impacts resulting


from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. The Master Plan does recommend updates to the SmartCode to ensure that proper implementation measures are in place to support development under the Master Plan. No new or increased impacts as a result of the Master Plan will result above what is already anticipated in the existing environmental documents. Depending on the attributes of these future planning efforts, additional environmental review will be completed.

11. Mineral Resources: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

X

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

X

Mineral Resources Impact Discussion: 11(a-b). No Impact: As a policy document, the Master Plan itself will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. The General Plan EIR determined that no mineral resources would be affected through the implementation of the General Plan, therefore the EIR did not include an impact analysis of mineral resources. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to mineral resources.

12. NOISE: Would the project result in:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

X

b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

X

c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

X

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

X

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

X

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

X


Noise Setting Noise sources in the Downtown Petaluma Station Area include vehicular traffic, industrial activities, and trains. Noise from vehicular traffic is primarily generated on East Washington Street, Lakeville Street, East D Street, and Petaluma Boulevard. Industrial noise sources include mechanical equipment, trucks, and refrigeration units. Freight train service through Petaluma is currently irregular, and thus does not generate significant noise, however, the addition of SMART service will contribute to noise within the station area. Noise sources in the Corona Road Station Area include vehicular traffic, trains, and agricultural activities. Noise from vehicular traffic is primarily generated on Highway 101, Corona Road, and McDowell Boulevard. Heavy rail tracks bisect the study area and, as noted above, while freight train service through Petaluma is currently limited, the addition of SMART service will contribute to noise within the Corona Road Station Area. The station area is also subject to noise from tools and machinery as part of agricultural operations along Corona Road. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan related to noise are:

• Traffic related noise at General Plan buildout, which would result in a substantial increase in existing exterior noise levels that are currently above City standards.

• Cumulative noise from proposed resumption of freight and passenger rail operations and possible resumption of intra-city trolley service, which would increase noise impacts.

All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the Master Plan. Noise Impact Discussion: 12(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the City of Petaluma’s Noise Ordinance (Petaluma Municipal Code, Section 22-301), or applicable standards of other agencies. Existing noise regulations are present and apply to all development projects in the City. Additionally, future projects would be subject to CEQA, and, if review was triggered, it would include traffic and noise analysis and, where necessary, mitigation. Future projects encouraged or accommodated by the Master Plan may produce traffic noise in levels that exceed City standards for noise-sensitive land uses in the developed areas of the City, but any such impacts would be addressed during the environmental review process for the specific development. 12(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne noise levels. Construction activities that would occur as projects are implemented under the proposed Master Plan would have the potential to generate low levels of groundborne vibration. Impacts associated with noise and vibrations were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures, integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and programs, will reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. All future development will be subject to site-specific environmental studies as determined appropriate by the City and will comply with all City policies and regulations related to noise. 12(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the City above levels existing without the project. Impacts associated with noise and vibrations were addressed in the EIR for the General Plan. Mitigation measures, integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and programs, will reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. All future development will be subject to site-specific environmental studies as determined appropriate by the City and will comply with all City policies and regulations related to noise. 12(d). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the City above levels existing without the project. Construction activities that would occur as projects are implemented under the proposed Master Plan would have the


potential to generate temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Impacts associated with temporary increase in ambient noise levels were addressed in the EIR for the General Plan. Mitigation measures, integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and programs, will reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. All future development will be subject to site-specific environmental studies as determined appropriate by the City and will comply with all City policies and regulations related to noise. 12(e). No Impact: Not applicable. The project is not located within the airport approach zones or the Sonoma County Airport Land Use Commission referral area, nor is it within two miles of a public or public use airport. 12(f). No Impact: Not applicable. The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip

13. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

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

X

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

X

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

X

Population and Housing Setting The transit-oriented residential development that is proposed under the Master Plan supports SMART ridership goals and is intended to provide residents with a range of housing unit types and sizes. The Master Plan proposes to provide diverse housing opportunities near the Downtown Petaluma and Corona Road SMART stations. The Plan includes recommendations to encourage and facilitate residential development, an analysis of residential development potential, and potential sources to finance affordable and workforce residential development. The Downtown Petaluma Station Area could potentially accommodate over 1,500 additional units on station area catalyst sites and vacant and underutilized sites as identified in the Housing Element. Within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area, there are 3 primary catalyst sites (Golden Eagle Shopping Center, the Haystack Parcel, and the SMART parcel), which present the best opportunity for transforming the Downtown Petaluma Station Area, meeting the goals of the General Plan and CPSP and the community’s vision. The additional units could result in a total of over 3,500 units within a half-mile of the Downtown Petaluma Station Area. In addition, vacant and underutilized sites within the Corona Road Station Area could accommodate approximately 487 new units. Assuming that 15 percent of the new units were affordable, as proposed in Chapter 4. Housing Recommendation 1, the station area could accommodate approximately 73 affordable units Population and Housing Impact Discussion: 13(a). Less Than Significant: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself induce substantial population growth in the area. Population growth estimates for the Master Plan were based on adjusted state projections. The projections used show a population low of 69,466 and a population high of 71,865. This is below that projected for buildout under the 2008 General Plan, which is 72,707 by 2025. Therefore, population growth estimated for this Master Plan is consistent with the 2008 General Plan. New housing


development as infill development within the parameters of housing densities established by the Land Use Element will not induce substantial population growth beyond that estimated by the General Plan. Additionally, the Master Plan includes an analysis and program for the necessary infrastructure that will be required at proposed build-out. The infrastructure improvements are designed to accommodate the full capacity at proposed build-out and because the master plan will not be completed all at once the program establishes priorities and phasing of construction. Therefore, the impact from growth in the area (directly and indirectly) is less than significant. 13(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Master Plan proposes to implement policies from the City of Petaluma 2009-2014 Housing Element that support the development of on-site inclusionary housing, provide incentives for residential development, prioritize affordable housing subsidies, and preserve existing residential units. The project helps to implement City’s Housing Element programs and policies that facilitate housing conservation and maintenance and therefore has the potential to improve the quality of the existing housing stock within the City of Petaluma. There is no impact. 13(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Master Plan areas are largely built out; proposed residential development will be primarily infill development on vacant or underutilized nonresidential sites. The Master Plan contains recommendations to address the City's future housing needs by encouraging housing that provides diversity in type and price. No aspect of the project involves the displacement of any number of people. There is no impact.

14. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Other public facilities? X

Public Services Setting: The City charges one-time impact fees on new private development in order to offset the cost of improving or expanding City facilities to accommodate the project. Impact fees are used to help fund the construction or expansion of needed capital improvements. Petaluma collects impact fees for open space, parkland, and others. Development impact fees are necessary in order to finance required public facilities and service improvements and to pay for new development's fair share of the costs of the required public facilities and service improvements. The City is served by Petaluma government services.


Public Services Impact Discussion: 14(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities to maintain necessary levels of service. The proposed downtown development areas are generally well served with public utilities and will not require a significant amount of infrastructure costs to serve the proposed build-out of the development. Impacts associated with new fire protection facilities resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Petaluma General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures are designed to reduce all significant impacts to levels of less than significant. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to Public services. 14(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities. Impacts associated with new police protection facilities resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures are designed to reduce all significant impacts to levels of less than significant. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to Public services. 14(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered school facilities. Impacts to school facilities were addressed in the General Plan and EIR. There are three different elementary school districts (Petaluma City Unified, Waugh, and Cinnabar) within the Corona Station Area, while the Downtown Petaluma Station Area is entirely within the Petaluma City Unified School District. The General Plan estimated that the Waugh and Cinnabar School Districts would decrease their enrollments while the Petaluma City Unified School District would experience an increase in enrollment. The City’s secondary schools belong to the Petaluma Joint Union High School District and serve both the Corona and Downtown Station Areas and are estimated to have a decrease in enrollment. With future development in the Downtown Petaluma Station Area, it is likely that McKinley Elementary School will experience an increase in enrollment. If the expected enrollment exceeds capacity at McKinley, the Petaluma City Unified School District will be able to adjust the attendance boundaries with the other elementary schools in the district. 14(d). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities. There are eleven existing public parks within the two station areas totaling 16.2 acres. Within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area there are three proposed parks totaling 42 acres. Additionally, with the Master Plan, there is also approximately 2.5 acres of park and open space proposed between the SMART station and the Petaluma River and between East Washington Street and East D Street. The City has adopted a citywide parks standard of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. With the proposed park and open space component of the Master Plan areas, there is sufficient space reserved for future parks required with the increase in population. Mitigation measures supporting parks or other recreational facilities were integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to parks or other recreational facilities. 14(e). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered public facilities. The proposed Master Plan


areas are generally well served with public utilities and will not require a significant amount of infrastructure costs to serve the proposed build-out of the development. Impacts associated with new public facilities resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the City, were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to public services.

15. RECREATION: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

X

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

X

Recreation Setting The public space framework put forth in the proposed Master Plan accommodates a wide range of uses and variety of spaces for recreation, such as hardscaped plazas, a formal Neighborhood Square, an informal outdoor theater, boardwalk overviews, and a linear park. Recreation Impact Discussion: 15(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself result in an increase in use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of facilities would occur or be accelerated. Impacts to existing recreational facilities resulting from population growth were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the 2008 General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to recreational facilities. 15(b). No impact: The Master Plan does not have provisions or requirements for the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The public space framework put forth in the proposed Master Plan does recommend improvements that involve construction of a new neighborhood square, Turning Basin Public open space improvements, an amphitheater, but not specific recreation facilities. Impacts associated with the construction or expansion of recreational facilities in response to population growth has been addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures were integrated into the 2008 General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to levels of less than significant. Depending on the attributes of each individual development proposal, future development will be subject to additional environmental review and compliance with all applicable policies related to recreational facilities.


16. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs

regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

X

Transportation and Circulation Setting The Master Plan includes recommended access, connectivity, and parking improvements in the area within a half-mile radius of the planned Corona Road and Downtown Petaluma Stations (the Master Plan areas), including:

• A description of the multimodal approach and principles for planning and prioritizing projects, programs, and use of public rights-of-way.

• An overview of planned access & connectivity improvements within the Downtown Petaluma and Corona Road Station Areas, including:

o New sidewalks and pedestrian facilities, o New multi-use pathways (MUP), including the planned SMART MUP o New on-street bike lanes o New Neighborhood Greenways o Multimodal bridge improvements

• Recommended enhancements for Petaluma Transit and shuttle service to and within each station area.

• ‘Complete streets’ and universal design standards. • A detailed description of and plan for multimodal access to the Downtown Petaluma Station Area

and circulation within the adjacent parcels planned for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). • Anticipated parking demand for:

o Commuter parking (station-generated demand) o Residential parking (TOD generated demand) o Employment/commercial parking (TOD generated demand)


• Potential for shared parking and priced parking; • Feasibility of establishing parking maximum ratios and abolishing minimum parking ratios. • Potential TOD Parking Policies for these station areas, including strategies to reduce parking

demand and promote alternative means of station access. This includes recommendations for: o TOD parking ratios for residential and commercial projects o The share of parking to be built at surface and in structures in each phase of

development.

The public space framework put forth in the Master Plan accommodates a wide range of uses and variety of spaces to enhance pedestrian circulation, such as hardscaped plazas, a formal neighborhood square, boardwalk overviews, and a linear park. The phased approach will also enable surface parking to be used to meet the needs of existing site uses and transit riders until the Corona Road Station, which will serve as a commuter park-n-ride station, is completed. The SmartCode Amendments include thoroughfare design standards, movement types, and design speeds. The thoroughfare design standards are intended to balance vehicular traffic, pedestrian, traffic, and access. Movement types (Yield, Slow, Low, Suburban) are intended to assist in the selection of the appropriate thoroughfare design for the necessary level of pedestrian and bicyclist safety and comfort at any given location, while design speed is the primary determinant of movement type. The design criteria for Yield, Slow, and Low Thoroughfares shall be commensurate with local thoroughfares. The impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the General Plan related to traffic are:

• Increased motor vehicle traffic which would result in unacceptable level of service (LOS) at six study intersections:

o McDowell Boulevard North/Corona Road o Lakeville Street/Caulfield Lane o Lakeville Street/East D Street o Petaluma Boulevard South/D Street o Sonoma Mt. Parkway/Ely Boulevard South/East Washington Street o McDowell Boulevard North/Rainier Avenue

All General Plan policies adopted as mitigation apply to the Master Plan. Transportation and Circulation Impact Discussion: 16(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Increases in traffic resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City have been addressed in the General Plan EIR. The traffic impacts of any new development will be addressed in separate site-specific studies. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 16(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself cause traffic levels to exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City on the level of service for roads or highways were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. The traffic impacts of any new residential development will be addressed in separate site-specific studies. 16(c). No Impact: Adoption of the Master Plan will not have any impact on air traffic patterns, given the nature and location of anticipated residential development outside of the established airport flight pattern.


16(d). No Impact: Adoption of the Master Plan, a policy document, does not involve construction or physical design. Therefore, there are no anticipated impacts associated with hazards due to transportation-related design features or incompatible uses. 16(e). No Impact: Adoption of the Master Plan, a policy document, does not involve construction or physical design. No implementation measure or policy of the element would result in the construction of residential units that could result in inadequate emergency access. 16(f). No Impact: None of the recommendations contained in the Master Plan conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative modes of transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks).

17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:


Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact

No Impact

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

X

b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

X

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

X

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

X

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

X

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

X

g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

X


Utilities and Service Systems The City charges one-time impact fees on new private development in order to offset the cost of improving or expanding City facilities to accommodate the project. Impact fees are used to help fund the construction or expansion of needed capital improvements. Petaluma collects impact fees for open space, park land, traffic impact, wastewater, water capacity, storm drain, public art, and others. The Master Plan includes an infrastructure needs analysis, where it determined the proposed Master Plan areas are generally well served with public utilities and will not require a significant amount of infrastructure costs to serve the proposed build-out of the development. “Order of magnitude” costs for these utility improvements are identified in the following Table 6.2.B. Utilities and Service Systems Impact Discussion: 17(a). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself cause or exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Impact of full residential build-out on wastewater treatment requirements was addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 17(b). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Within the Downtown Petaluma Station Area a new 18” water main along East Washington Street is planned for installation in 2013. Existing 8” and 12” water mains are located within Copeland St., Weller St., and a portion of East D St. The development area anticipates buildings with 4 to 5 floors that will require the capability of high water flows for fire protection. With the installation of new 12” water mains in the new streets, the grid of water mains will be complete, providing a network that will be able to serve the proposed development build-out. The Downtown Petaluma Station Area is well served for sewer, with existing large trunk sewer mains along Lakeville St., East D St., Copeland St., and a portion of Weller St. The proposed development will need to install 8” collector mains in the new streets and will be able to discharge into the existing trunk sewer mains. The construction relating to these improvements were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 17(c). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan will not by itself require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. With new Low Impact Development (LID) requirements, the storm water runoff coming from developed sites may be required to mimic pre-developed conditions. Therefore, upsizing of storm drain mains may not be required with development. However, LID also requires water quality treatment of runoff coming from impervious surfaces. While on-site building improvements will treat and possibly detain runoff from building roofs, specialty storm water inlets with treatment components will need to be installed to handle runoff from streets and sidewalks. The Central Petaluma Specific Plan identified proposed 24” and 30” storm drains along the New Transverse Street to serve the specific plan. The cost for these storm drain mains have been included in the plan and cost estimate. Current Phase II Storm Water Regulations do not require storm water detention for a 2 year event in areas that directly discharge to portions of the river that are tidally influenced. Storm water detention for 10 and 100-year events may not be required in the lower reach of the watershed and will require further analysis as projects are proposed. Issues related to environmental effects resulting from the construction of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures were integrated into the


2008 General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. Environmental impacts related to the construction of new facilities will be addressed through CEQA analysis. 17(d). No Impact: Adopting the Master Plan is not the type of project that requires water, as the project is a policy document. The continued and anticipated population growth projected in the element is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and all other elements. Impacts related to future water supplies were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 17(e). No Impact: A Master Plan is not the type of project that could require a determination by the wastewater treatment provider regarding the adequate capacity of the facility to serve the projected demand of the project, as the project is a policy document. The continued and anticipated population growth projected in the element is consistent with the Land Use, Growth Management and Built Environment Section (Land Use Element) of the General Plan and all other elements. Impacts related to the adequacy or capacity of wastewater treatment providers to serve the anticipated population growth were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 17(f). No Impact: A Master Plan is not the type of project that would generate solid waste, as the project is a policy document. Impacts related to landfill capacity and solid waste disposal needs resulting from the anticipated population growth of the City were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 17(g). No Impact: A Master Plan is not a project subject to solid waste regulations as the project is a policy document, involving no new construction. Anticipated future development in the City and impacts related to solid waste were addressed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §15065)

A focused or full environmental impact report for a project may be required where the project has a significant effect on the environment in any of the following conditions: Potentially

Significant Impact


with Mitigation

Incorporated


Impact No Impact

Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

X

Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (i.e., incremental effects of a project

X


are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

X

III. INFORMATION SOURCES:

General Plan and Zoning Ordinance General Plan Chapter 1. Land Use,

Growth Management, & the Built Environment

General Plan Chapter 7. Community Facilities, Services & Education

General Plan Chapter 2. Community Design, Character, &Green Building

General Plan Chapter 8. Water Resources

General Plan Chapter 3. Historic Preservation

General Plan Chapter 9. Economic Health & Sustainability

General Plan Chapter 4. The Natural Environment

General Plan Chapter 10. Health & Safety

General Plan Chapter 5. Mobility General Plan Chapter 11. Housing General Plan Chapter 6. Recreation,

Music, Parks, & the Arts Implementing Zoning Ordinance/

Maps Other Sources of Information

Central Petaluma Specific Plan Other Records, Studies, Reports Central Petaluma Specific Plan EIR Published geological maps FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps General Plan 2025 EIR

CITY OF PETALUMA PETALUMA SMART RAIL STATION … · Page 1 of 40 February 28, 2013 CITY OF PETALUMA...

Documents

Transcript of CITY OF PETALUMA PETALUMA SMART RAIL STATION … · Page 1 of 40 February 28, 2013 CITY OF PETALUMA...