Posted on Categories Air, Land Use, TransportationTags , , , ,

BoDean asphalt plant moving to Windsor, with aim to convert Santa Rosa site to housing

Will Schmidt, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

The owners of a prominent asphalt plant in central Santa Rosa are planning to move their business to Windsor, laying the groundwork for affordable housing to replace an industrial operation that the owners acknowledge no longer fits into a neighborhood the city has targeted for dense residential development.

BoDean Co. founders Dean and Belinda “Bo” Soiland said their new, larger site in Windsor is better suited for continued industrial use than the current site south of West College Avenue, where the city has taken a stronger regulatory stance in recent years as complaints have mounted from neighbors.

Paperwork to build the new plant will be submitted to Windsor officials in July, Dean Soiland said. The Soilands had not finalized plans for their Santa Rosa property, though planning work there could proceed on a parallel track to development of the new Windsor plant.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9658672-181/bodean-asphalt-plant-moving-to

Posted on Categories Land UseTags , ,

Sonoma County eyes sale of Chanate Road property for 2nd time around

Guy Kovner, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Sonoma County, having renewed its bid to sell a nearly 72-acre property in northeast Santa Rosa, is in negotiations with three prospective buyers, including a company owned by Sonoma County developer Bill Gallaher, whose previous offer became mired in controversy and was dropped last year after a bitter legal battle.

The Chanate Road property, site of the old county hospital and later Sutter Medical Center, represents one of the largest pieces of land available for future housing in the city. Some neighbors staunchly opposed the more than 800 housing units proposed in the last purchase deal.

The property is now mostly vacant, its shuttered buildings a target for vandals and squatters, costing the county $800,000 a year to maintain, including security patrols.

Gallaher’s firm, OSL Properties LLC, was one of three housing developers that responded with offers following the county’s February solicitation to about 650 organizations.

The other two bidders are EAH Housing, a San Rafael-based nonprofit that has developed about 100 affordable housing projects worth about $1 billion in California and Hawaii, and the California Community Housing Agency.

In the previous go-round, the sprawling Chanate property was slated to be Santa Rosa’s largest housing project in at least a decade. Gallaher, well known for building homes in Oakmont and senior living facilities in Fountaingrove, wanted to build 867 housing units on the site, including rental apartment buildings three or four stories tall.

Neighbors vehemently opposed the plan and filed a lawsuit alleging the county should have conducted an environmental assessment of the project. A judge ruled in their favor, delivering the county a bruising loss and significantly delaying one of its most highly touted efforts to address the regional housing crisis.

Supervisors opted not to appeal and walked away from the multimillion-dollar deal with Gallaher in October. Two months later, the board voted to start over, prompting the request for new offers on the land.

Under the current bidding process, prospective buyers of the 71.6-acre site must be either designated public agencies or “housing sponsors” that would focus on building affordable housing. They need not be nonprofit organizations, said Caroline Judy, the county general services director.

State rules require that a quarter of the housing must be deemed affordable, with a 55-year deed restriction attached to the property, she said.

But unlike the first time around, the current proposals do not include any development plans, Judy said. Following the county’s decision on a buyer, Santa Rosa will be responsible for approving the plan — a step that was never fully launched under the previous deal.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9699083-181/sonoma-county-eyes-sale-of

Posted on Categories Land UseTags ,

Healdsburg loosens regulations on ‘granny units’ to address ongoing housing need

Kevin Fixler, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

The Healdsburg City Council on Monday advanced the county’s least restrictive rules on granny units to encourage development and help address the city’s ongoing and immediate need for more affordable workforce housing.

The move comes three years after a city housing action committee first made the recommendation to expand the size of the accessory units on existing home sites, as well as reduce the impact fees collected to build them. The council’s decision was seen as a victory in meeting Healdsburg’s plan to open up new ways to solve what has been branded a growing regional housing crisis.

“This has been a long process,” said Mayor David Hagele. “It’s a pretty big step that we’re taking. This is housing we want, and this is housing we need. This is a pretty happy moment that we’re able to take some action.”

The unanimous vote also followed the council’s direction to city staff to finalize a deal to buy two small, below-market rate apartment complexes not far from the downtown plaza, according to the real estate agent representing the seller. The two properties, each made up of eight low-rent units, are located at 531 University St. and 500 Piper St. Terms of the purchase agreement were not available Monday, though the asking price was $1.8 million and $1.5 million, respectively.

Once the new granny unit regulations go into effect in the next 45 days, residents will have fees waived on all those built up to 850 square feet. Under current city regulations, the dimension is the largest permitted and costs nearly $10,000 to construct, according to the city.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9571177-181/healdsburg-loosens-regulations-on-granny

Posted on Categories Agriculture/Food System, Land UseTags , ,

County of Sonoma proposing changes to Accessory Dwelling Unit Exclusions on AG Land

SONOMA COUNTY GAZETTE

The County of Sonoma is proposing changes to the Z (Accessory Dwelling Unit Exclusion) Combining District. PRMD File No. ZPE18-0001. The Sonoma County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to review the proposed amendments and make its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.

The public hearing will be held on May 2, 2019, at or after 1:20 p.m. at: Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department Hearing Room.2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 95403. The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing on the matter at a later date which will be publicly noticed at thattime.

Z District parcels in Agriculture zoned areas. Click to enlarge.

The proposed project would rezone smaller parcels in agricultural zones to remove the Z (Accessory Dwelling Unit Exclusion) Combining District, consistent with policies and programs in the Sonoma County General Plan. Rezoning would remove the prohibition on accessory dwelling units on affected parcels, but would not change the base zone or any other uses.

Eligible parcels were identified because they meet all of the following criteria:

Zoned Diverse Agriculture (DA), Land Intensive Agriculture (LIA), or Land Extensive Agriculture (LEA).
Not located in the Coastal Zone
Not under with a Land Conservation (Williamson Act) Contract
Not located in a Septic System Waiver Prohibition Area
Not located in the Traffic Sensitive Combining Zone
Not located in a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Not located in the designated critical habitat area for the California Tiger Salamander

The following mapping tool may be used to determine whether your property may be affected by the proposed action.https://bit.ly/2QyXRxM.

The project also includes a proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment which would extend the applicability of groundwater standards to future accessory dwelling units proposed in areas where additional groundwater use has the potential to threaten groundwater dependent ecosystems.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Additional details of the project are available at the Permit and Resource Management Department at the address noted above or on the County’s website at:https://bit.ly/2PdJuf

The department has determined that this project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 because the proposed action would implement an accessory dwelling unit ordinance pursuant to Government Code sec. 65852.2.

GET INVOLVED: Written comments may be submitted prior to or at the hearing. Please submit written materials 5 days prior to the hearing date so that it can be distributed and considered by the decision- makers. Any written material submitted after this date will be distributed to the decision-makers prior to or at the hearing.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding the proposed project, you may contact project planner, Doug Bush atDoug.Bush@sonoma-county.orgor (707) 565-5276.

If you challenge the decision on the project in court you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Permit and Resource Management Department at or prior to the public hearing.

Source: https://www.sonomacountygazette.com/sonoma-county-news/county-of-sonoma-proposing-changes-to-accessory-dwelling-unit-exclusions-on-ag-land

Posted on Categories Forests, Land UseTags , , ,

Op-Ed: Build to Survive: Homes in California’s burn zones must adopt fire-safe code

SACRAMENTO BEE EDITORIAL

After the apocalyptic Camp Fire reduced most of Paradise to ashes last November, a clear pattern emerged.

Fifty-one percent of the 350 houses built after 2008 escaped damage, according to an analysis by McClatchy. Yet only 18 percent of the 12,100 houses built before 2008 did.

What made the difference? Building codes.

The homes with the highest survival rate appear to have benefited from “a landmark 2008 building code designed for California’s fire-prone regions – requiring fire-resistant roofs, siding and other safeguards,” according to a story by The Sacramento Bee’s Dale Kasler and Phillip Reese.

When it comes to defending California’s homes against the threat of wildfires, regulation is protection. The fire-safe building code, known as the 7A code, worked as intended. Homes constructed in compliance with the 2008 standards were built to survive.

As many as 3 million homes stand in what the state calls “very high fire hazard severity zones,” according to Cal Fire. These areas, where the climate and the presence of combustible foliage can lead to tinderbox conditions, are destined to burn. The data on which homes survived the Camp Fire should be a call to action for every city in the danger zones.

Unfortunately, short-term thinking can triumph over common sense. Cities facing severe fire risks can avoid compliance with the fire-resistant building codes, or choose to avoid their obvious advantages, despite the fact that “a new home built to wild-fire-resistant codes can be constructed for roughly the same cost as a typical home,” according to a report by Headwaters Economics.

Take Santa Rosa’s Coffey Park neighborhood, where the Tubbs Fire killed five people and destroyed 1,321 homes in 2017. The neighborhood wasn’t considered a fire hazard zone, unlike some other areas of Santa Rosa. The Tubbs Fire proved otherwise, but Coffey Park still isn’t designated as a “very high fire hazard zone” by Cal Fire.

“City officials are OK with that,” according to The Bee. “Although developers rebuilding Coffey Park are being urged to consider fire-resistant materials, city spokeswoman Adriane Mertens said the city doesn’t see any reason to impose the 7A code in the neighborhood.”

Mertens suggested high winds on the night of the fire meant officials have no reason to require fire-safe construction as Coffey Park is rebuilt. One fire scientist called Santa Rosa’s stance “an error in judgment.”

Folsom also appears to have its head in the sand with regards to fire risk. It’s allowing the Folsom Ranch development to be built without adherence to the fire-safe code. The parcel of land south of Highway 50 was formerly managed by Cal Fire and designated as a moderate fire risk zone, which would trigger the fire-safe building requirements. Once Folsom annexed the land for the new development, the city decided to opt out of the 7A code because the area was never considered a “very high” fire hazard zone.

The city will require “vegetation management” plans and fire-resistant fencing. But they may eventually put 25,000 people into non-fire-safe housing in an area Cal Fire knows has a higher risk of burning.

Getting officials and developers to follow the fire-safe code in increased risk zones is hard. But the even bigger problem is how to retrofit the millions of homes built before the new standards existed.

“What are we going to do about the existing housing stock that’s been built in these places?” asked Max Moritz, a wildfire specialist at UC Santa Barbara interviewed by The Bee. “For the existing housing stock that’s out there, that isn’t built to these codes, we have a massive retrofitting issue on our hands.”

“You’ve got to get in and retrofit,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom, citing McClatchy’s reporting during a press conference at the state’s Office of Emergency Services operations center.

Assembly Bill 38 is a good place to start. The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Jim Wood of Santa Rosa would provide $1 billion in loan funds to help homeowners retrofit their properties. It’s not enough money to retrofit every home, but it’s a start and that can raise public awareness of the dire need for fire-safe retrofits in hazard zones.

The state fire marshal is currently developing a list of low-cost fire retrofits that the state plans to promote once it’s finalized in 2020.

In addition, Cal Fire is revising its fire zone maps, and the “very high fire hazard” zones will surely spread over a larger portion of the state. This time around, local officials won’t be able to opt out of the requirements, as they can under current law.

A series of recent “atmospheric river” storms made fire season seem like a bad memory. But it’s all too easy for most Californians to forget that these rains feed the growth of vegetation that turns into kindling.

Thanks to McClatchy’s analysis, we now know fire-safe building codes can mean the difference between survival and destruction. When the next big incinerating fire barrels down on a city full of ready-to-burn homes in the hazard zone, we can’t claim we didn’t know better.

Source: https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article229425004.html

Posted on Categories Land Use, Sustainable LivingTags , ,

A model for achieving housing goals takes shape in Sonoma County

Nadine Ono, CAFWD

Housing in Sonoma County was the top priority for political, business and philanthropic leaders who met last year after the devasting 2017 fires destroyed more than 5,100 homes. Since that first meeting participants hit the ground running to ensure the region not only recover lost housing, but also establish an environment to create new and affordable housing.

“We’re organizing a grassroots campaign to be pro-housing to support projects that come up,” said Santa Rosa Metro Chamber CEO Peter Rumble on the establishment of the Sonoma County Housing Council, which brings together 15 of the region’s largest employers to invest in housing projects and is in the process of establishing a local housing trust.

It is a much-needed vehicle in the region as there was previously no local housing fund. Added Rumble, “To be able to have a separate fund that can be used to help bridge the gap of affordable or workforce level housing in addition to any funds that might be available through the public process is a tremendous boon for the community.”

While the Santa Rosa Metro Chamber was creating the Housing Council, the City of Santa Rosa was laying the groundwork to make housing a priority.

“The big focus this past year has been on housing elements,” said David Guhin, Santa Rosa’s assistant city manager and director of economic development. “We put a number of policies into place over the past year in anticipation on focusing on infill development and setting ourselves up to be the leaders and the example of how the policies can help support achieving some of the housing goals that we want to achieve.”

The housing elements achieved by Santa Rosa include:

  • Unanimous support of housing goals from the city council and making it a top five priority for the city
  • Establishing new citywide housing policies including new accessory dwelling unit policies that reduce or eliminate some fees, feasibility study on the current inclusionary policy and an aggressive housing action plan
  • New downtown housing policies that include creating a high-density residential incentive program, increasing building height requirements and decreasing parking requirements, express permitting, designating downtown as a Federal Opportunity Zone, offering density bonuses and evaluating city property for housing
  • Create regional partnerships including a Renewal Enterprise District JPA, evaluating tax increment financing with Sonoma County and coordinating with the Employers Housing Council

    Guhin added, “This is a fairly aggressive new model, it’s one that basically says we can’t do it alone and this won’t work unless everyone participates in some way. It’s encouraging to see employers sitting around a table talking about housing.”

Read more at http://cafwd.org/reporting/entry/a-model-for-achieving-housing-goals-takes-shape-in-sonoma-county

Posted on Categories Land UseTags , ,

Santa Rosa discusses lifting growth cap

Will Schmitt, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Santa Rosa may revisit 27-year-old caps on growth in its struggle to create more places to live, as the city continues to greenlight an increasingly higher volume of homes and apartments to alleviate its housing shortage.

The city approved building permits for 431 residential units — not including hundreds of applications to rebuild homes destroyed by the October 2017 wildfires — in 2018, the third consecutive year the figure increased, according to an annual development review presented to the City Council and Planning Commission on Tuesday.

Though 1,400 Santa Rosa homes and apartments have received building permits since 2015, the city would need to approve an average of 925 housing units annually — more than double the amount it approved last year — from 2019 through 2022 to meet a housing quota it adopted in 2014.

“The need for more housing is clear,” said Amy Nicholson, a city planner and one of several staffers who relayed volumes of information to council members and planning commissioners Tuesday.

The 431 newly approved units mark a five-year peak, but the figure is well below the 800-unit annual cap set by Santa Rosa’s 1992 growth management ordinance. David Guhin, assistant city manager and planning and economic development director, expects the ordinance will be reviewed as part of a long-term citywide planning effort.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9445062-181/santa-rosas-housing-focus-may?sba=AAS

Posted on Categories Land UseTags , ,

Two major southwest Santa Rosa developments set for review

Will Schmitt, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

A landmark Roseland project featuring new housing and public space is poised to move forward while another nearby planned subdivision appears stalled ahead of hearings before the Santa Rosa Planning Commission this week.

The commission will meet at 4 p.m. Thursday at City Hall to consider the Roseland Village Neighborhood Center project and the Dutton Meadows subdivision in southwest Santa Rosa. The two projects combined could create up to 386 new housing units in the least developed corner of Santa Rosa.

Trumark Homes initially proposed building more than 100 townhomes on about 18 acres it bought nearly two decades ago near Hearn Avenue and Dutton Meadow, a project the city approved in 2006. However, the San Ramon-based developer abandoned the project because of the recession.

Environmental studies already were taken care of, he said, but “the project never penciled” out, said Robin Miller, Trumark Homes planning director. The Dutton Meadows project was revived after the 2017 wildfires, he said.

The current proposal calls for up to 130 single-family homes and 81 detached secondary housing units, with about 20 of the homes designated as affordable housing.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9322585-181/two-major-southwest-santa-rosa

Posted on Categories Land UseTags , ,

How to help west county residents impacted by the flood County declares health emergency due to hazardous waste, ‘flood crud’ Petaluma police arrest man asleep at the wheel Santa Rosa: 250 million gallons of treated sewage released into waterways since storm Two major southwest Santa Rosa developments set for review

Will Schmitt, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

A landmark Roseland project featuring new housing and public space is poised to move forward while another nearby planned subdivision appears stalled ahead of hearings before the Santa Rosa Planning Commission this week.

The commission will meet at 4 p.m. Thursday at City Hall to consider the Roseland Village Neighborhood Center project and the Dutton Meadows subdivision in southwest Santa Rosa. The two projects combined could create up to 386 new housing units in the least developed corner of Santa Rosa.

Trumark Homes initially proposed building more than 100 townhomes on about 18 acres it bought nearly two decades ago near Hearn Avenue and Dutton Meadow, a project the city approved in 2006. However, the San Ramon-based developer abandoned the project because of the recession.

Environmental studies already were taken care of, he said, but “the project never penciled” out, said Robin Miller, Trumark Homes planning director. The Dutton Meadows project was revived after the 2017 wildfires, he said.

The current proposal calls for up to 130 single-family homes and 81 detached secondary housing units, with about 20 of the homes designated as affordable housing.

The current design would be financially feasible for Trumark, Miller said. If it doesn’t go forward, Santa Rosa would “lose 211 home opportunities.”

Santa Rosa made housing a top priority even before the 2017 fires, which wiped out 5 percent of the city’s housing stock. The City Council has passed a battery of new measures meant to make the city more attractive to housing developers, particularly those who wanted to build downtown apartment towers.

But concerns about how Trumark’s current project could impact traffic in the future led city staff to oppose it.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9322585-181/two-major-southwest-santa-rosa

Posted on Categories Land Use, Sustainable LivingTags , , ,

Sonoma County renews effort to sell Chanate Road property for housing

Guy Kovner, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Call it Chanate 2.0.

Sonoma County supervisors are once again seeking to sell a nearly 72-acre property in northeast Santa Rosa to an affordable housing developer, reviving an effort started more than three years ago that triggered a neighborhood rebellion and a legal challenge that ultimately forced the county to cancel a deal with a prominent local homebuilder.

The property in question is at 3313 Chanate Road, site of the old county hospital and later Sutter Medical Center. It was slated by the county to be one of Santa Rosa’s largest single housing projects in recent memory.

But the legal setback prompted the county in October to walk away from a multimillion-dollar deal with developer Bill Gallaher, who wanted to build 867 housing units on the sprawling site, including rental apartment buildings three or four stories tall, a prospect that neighbors vehemently opposed.

In December, supervisors voted to start all over again, and county staffers last week solicited financial offers from about 650 organizations, including five local Native American tribes.

Prospective buyers are limited, under state law, to designated public agencies and “housing sponsors” that would focus on building affordable housing, with parks, schools or other government facilities as alternatives. For housing sponsors, the property would carry a 55-year deed restriction for affordable housing.

Read more at https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9284804-181/sonoma-county-renews-effort-to