AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND JOINT MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CLOVERDALE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY

February 10, 2010 CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC BUSINESS SESSION: 6:30 p.m. CLOVERDALE SENIOR CENTER, 311 N MAIN STREET, CLOVERDALE, CA 95425

The Cloverdale City Council welcomes you to its meetings that are typically scheduled for the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of the month. Your interest and participation are encouraged and appreciated. Please silence all pagers, cellular telephones and other communications devices upon entering the meeting.

ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL: When asked to do so by the Mayor, those wishing to address the City Council are asked to step up to the podium. Speak directly into the microphone so everyone in the audience can hear your comments and so they’ll be recorded into the official record. State your name and City of Residence for the record. Per City Council Policy, three (3) minutes are typically allotted to each speaker. However, Council may at its discretion revise the amount of time allotted. Public comments will normally be received after staff presentations on an agenda item and before the City Council starts deliberations. A Talking Tips sheet is available for your use.

We may disagree, but we will be respectful of one another. All comments will be directed to the issue at hand, and addressed to the City Council. Personal attacks are unacceptable.

DISABLED OR SPECIAL NEEDS ACCOMMODATION: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to attend or participate in a City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office at 894-2521. Notification at least 48-hours prior to the meeting will assist the City Clerk in assuring that reasonable accommodations are made to provide accessibility to the meeting.

WAIVER WARNING: If you challenge decisions/directions of the City Council in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at public hearings(s) described in this Agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Cloverdale at, or prior to, the public hearing(s). CLOSED SESSION –5:30 p.m. OPENING:  Call to Order  Roll Call  Agenda Review - Closed Session (Changes and/or Deletions)

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION AGENDA: Prior to adjournment into Closed Session, the public may speak on items to be addressed in Closed Session.

RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION:

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIORS: The City Council is conducting a closed session pursuant to California Government Code section 54957.6; Agency designated representative: Nina Regor. Employee Organization: Cloverdale Dispatchers’ Association

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS: The City Council is conducting a closed session pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8 regarding real property APN 001-300-006 PTN to discuss negotiations. Agency Negotiators: Nina Regor; Karen Shimizu; Negotiating Party: Erickson

CONVENE PUBLIC BUSINESS SESSION –6:30 p.m.

OPENING:  Call to Order  Pledge of Allegiance  Report Out of Closed Session –Actions Taken  Conflict of Interest Declaration  Agenda Review –Regular Session (Changes and/or Deletions)

PUBLIC COMMENTS: Any person wishing to speak to the City Council on any item not listed on the agenda may do so at this time. Members of the public have the right to speak on any items on the Council Agenda during that item. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the City Council is not allowed to consider issues or take action on any item not listed on the agenda. Each person wishing to speak must go to the podium when advised by the Mayor and speak directly into the microphone.

PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS:

1. A Presentation by Tina Panza, Director of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, about the Safe Routes to School Program. (CC) Herpst

2. Station Area/Downtown Plan Public Study Session. (CC) Shimizu/Kibby Staff recommends that the City Council review the Planning Commission recommendations, take additional testimony, and recommend changes to finalize the Station Area/Downtown Plan for public hearing on February 24, 2010. Agenda 2/10/2010 Page 2 of 5 AB343 Requirements: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Hall offices located at 124 N Cloverdale Blvd, Cloverdale CA 95425 during normal business hours. COUNCIL REPORTS: (VERBAL REPORT)

CONSENT CALENDAR: All items under Consent Calendar will be considered together by one action of the Council unless any Council Member or member of the public requests that an item be removed and considered separately.

3. Approval of Minutes (1 Set) –Regular Meeting of January 13, 2010 (CC) Garibaldi

4. Resolution No. 001-2010, Revising Enabling Legislation for Council Subcommittees, and Repealing City Council Resolution No. 045-2009. (CC) Regor Recommendation: Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 001-2010, revising enabling legislation for Council Subcommittees, and repealing Resolution No. 045-2009.

5. Resolution No. 011-2010, Adopting the Memberships and Typical Meeting Days/Times for Council Subcommittees and Joint Committees, and Appointing the City of Cloverdale Representatives on Regional Boards. (CC) Regor Recommendation: Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 011-2010, adopting the memberships and typical meeting days/times for Council Subcommittees and Joint Committees, and appointing the City of Cloverdale representatives on Regional Boards.

6. Resolution No. 014-2010 approving a revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Alexander Valley Resort Project 1. (CC) Lewitter Recommendation: Move to approve by title only Resolution No. 014-2010 adopting a revised mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the Alexander Valley Resort project, located on approximately 254 acres of land lying west of Asti Road, west of the Russian River, south of Santana Drive and north of Cloverdale Municipal Airport (APNs 116-260-012; 116- 310-013 & -014; 117-050-007, -010, -011, 012, -015, -016, -017, -018 & -019)

7. Resolution No. 012-2010 Appointing the Engineer of Work for the Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2010-11. (CC) Wade Recommendation: Consider adopting a resolution appointing Coastland Civil Engineering as the Engineer of Work for the FY 2010-11 Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District and directing them to prepare and to file the Annual Engineer’s Report pursuant to Section 22622 of the Streets and Highways Code.

COMMUNICATIONS: Council may discuss at this time written communications sent to Council members since the last council meeting. Written communication to be discussed will be listed below, if any.

8. Sonoma County Mayors/Councilmembers’ Association 2/11/10 Agenda –request for each member City’s position on a potential County ballot opposing gambling casinos in Sonoma County. (CC) Regor

Agenda 2/10/2010 Page 3 of 5 AB343 Requirements: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Hall offices located at 124 N Cloverdale Blvd, Cloverdale CA 95425 during normal business hours. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

9. Resolution No. 013-2010 Approving a Property Tax Exchange with the Cloverdale Fire Protection District to Provide for Long Term City Funding of the Fire District and Approving a Settlement Agreement to Resolve All Historic Funding Disputes between the Fire District and the City. (CC) Danly/Regor Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 013-2010 by title only, decreasing the City of Cloverdale’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 and increasing the Cloverdale Fire Protection District’s factor by .04438 in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012 and 013 effective July 1, 2010 and approving a settlement agreement between the Fire District and the City intended to permanently resolve historic funding disputes between the agencies and authorizing the City Manager to sign the settlement agreement on behalf of the City.

NEW BUSINESS:

10. Resolution No. 010-2010 approving an agreement with the Voigt Family Sculpture Agreement authorizing the placement and display of VFSF-owned artwork on City-owned property (CC) Shimizu Recommendation: Move to approve by title only Resolution No. 010-2010 an agreement with the Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation (VFSF) authorizing the placement and display of VFSF-owned artwork entitled, “Shadows of Eternity” on City-owned property and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement

SUBCOMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS:

FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE -

11. CPAC Building and Operations Funding Update (CC) Regor

SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS: (VERBAL REPORT)

 Airport (Chair, Vice Mayor Raymond and Mayor Russell)  Finance (Chair, Councilmember Wolter and Councilmember Palla)  General Administration (Chair, Councilmember Palla and Mayor Russell)  Planning/CDA (Chair, Councilmember Brigham and Councilmember Wolter)  Police (Chair, Councilmember Brigham and Councilmember Wolter)  Public Works (Chair, Councilmember Palla and Mayor Russell)  City/Fire District (Chair, Councilmember Wolter and Vice Mayor Raymond)  City/School District (Chair, Councilmember Palla and Vice Mayor Raymond)

CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY REPORT:

COUNCIL DIRECTION ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:

Agenda 2/10/2010 Page 4 of 5 AB343 Requirements: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Hall offices located at 124 N Cloverdale Blvd, Cloverdale CA 95425 during normal business hours. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourn the City Council to the next scheduled meeting of the City Council, Cloverdale Community Development Agency and Cloverdale Improvement Authority scheduled February 24, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. at the Cloverdale Senior Center, Cloverdale, CA 95425.

The City does not transcribe its proceedings. Anyone who desires a verbatim record of this meeting should arrange for attendance by a court reporter or for other acceptable means of recordation. Such arrangements will be at the sole expense of the individual requesting the recordation. Questions about this agenda should be directed to City Hall at 707/894-2521. State of California County of Sonoma City of Cloverdale CERTIFICATION I, Briana Herpst, hereby declares under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda was posted on the outdoor bulletin board at the City Hall, 124 N Cloverdale Blvd, Cloverdale, California, and made available for public review, prior to or on this 5th day of February, 2010, at or before 5:00 p.m.

______Briana Herpst, Administrative Specialist

Agenda 2/10/2010 Page 5 of 5 AB343 Requirements: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Hall offices located at 124 N Cloverdale Blvd, Cloverdale CA 95425 during normal business hours. City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 1 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Proclamations/Presentations Briana Herpst Agenda Item Title Safe Routes to Schools Summary Tina Panza, Director of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, will be presenting on the Safe Routes to Schools Program. Ms. Panza will give a power point presentation to Council and will have a one-page hand out to distribute at the meeting.

Options N/A Budget/Financial Impact N/A Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action N/A

Attachments: cc:

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451 Pg 1 (Rev. 01/09) City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 2 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Proclamations/Presentations Bruce Kibby, Community Development Director Agenda Item Title Station Area/Downtown Plan Public Study Session Summary This is a public study session to allow Council discussion of the Station Area/Downtown Plan (prior to public hearing) and possible adoption at the February 24 City Council meeting. On January 20, 2010, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval to the City Council with minor changes. Staff has recommended added minor changes based on the Planning Commission public hearing. The Cloverdale Station Area/Downtown Plan is a guide for integrating the City and the new passenger rail service to the Cloverdale Depot, with a particular emphasis on: • The Cloverdale Depot • Cloverdale Downtown • The opportunity development sites at Citrus Fair Drive and Cloverdale Boulevard (Thyme Square site owned by the City and the Citrus Fair Site). The plan was prepared with extensive public input: • Background and recommendations by planning consultant Freedman, Tung and Sasaki (FTS), Economic Consultant Mundie and Associates, Traffic & Parking consultant Nelson Nygaard and Associates. • Urban Land Institute (ULI) TOD Marketplace study. • Three Public Input Meetings • 10/26/09 joint Planning Commission/City Council Meeting. Staff Report Attachment A shows a comparison of FTS, ULI, and Plan provisions an implementation. The minutes of the January 20, 2010 Planning Commission meeting are attached. The staff report and PowerPoint presentation for that meeting are also attached. In addition to the minor amendments recommended by the Planning Commission, a minor change in number of units expected in the Station Area based on ABAG comments was also made. The FTS sketch plans for north and south anchors were presented at the meeting, and some of the comments relate to those plans. Several comments were made by the audience and the Commission. Those are in the minutes. A summary of the comments is listed below. Planning Commission Comments. 1. Add group care facilities to the TOD (Transit Oriented Development) Core zone. (Change was made.) 2. Clarify that parking is not allowed between back of sidewalk and building faces in the Downtown Core. (Change was made.) 3. City Manager suggestion to clarify that freeway on and off ramps should be redesigned to slow traffic and protect pedestrian crossings. (Change was made.) 4. The Commission supports moving public uses out of the north anchor area, but still close to the downtown. Other civic uses would also help the downtown. 5. Events in the Plaza have brought new life to Cloverdale, and the Plaza should not be boxed in. P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) 6. The Plaza should be the north anchor for the downtown. Public Comments 7. The Façade Improvement Program should be re-instated in order to meet design goals and form based zoning goals. The Plaza should be extended, possibly to First Street. Cloverdale needs a larger Plaza. 8. The FTS concept plan for the north anchor limits economic development potential and places too much public use in the downtown core. A secondary area for public use just outside the downtown core would be better. The north anchor, with public uses, is not really an anchor. The north anchor is not a revenue generator. 9. There is too much truck traffic on Broad Street, and the Post office creates parking issues for customers. 10. The downtown needs a large anchor tenant. Anchor tenants, like a supermarket, woul want support uses rather than a stand-alone store, and do not want to back onto the street, so a shopping center configuration would be best for the south anchor. 11. The City should talk to brokers about the proposed plan, in order to provide market feasibility related to rents, space needs, type of business that would want to locate in Cloverdale. (Change was made.) Staff observations related to the comments. Items 1, 2, 3. Those changes are consistent with the directions determined by the workshops and are incorporated in the plan. Items 4, 8, & 9. Generally, the City Hall and Public Uses should not be the northern anchor. Post Office is a problem. Response. Immediate goals of the plan is to keep the downtown compact so that pedestrian businesses are in walking distance of each other and to retain existing activity generators. Making the City Hall land available for retail use would expand the downtown, rather than keeping it compact. Moving public uses would remove activity generators at a time when activity is needed. However, moving the civic center could be considered if there is a developer who wants to provide a commercial north anchor or as a long term reserve of land should the pedestrian downtown flourish and need room to expand. Items 5, 6, and 7 are strong ideas and can be implemented within the Plan framework without a Plan change. Item 10. In general, it supports a neighborhood shopping center (e.g. a Furber Plaza) on Thyme Square and Citrus Fair. The Plan is based on the idea that housing will provide customers for downtown and passenger rail. However, there is a provision in the Commercial Zoning that allows the City to use the Thyme Square and/or Citrus Fair sites for City-developed downtown catalyst uses, which could include a shopping center. Item 11. Coordinate with brokers and real estate professionals. Staff has added an Implementation Program 1.g.iv in response to this input. The Station Area/Downtown Plan and ULI TOD Marketplace reports both had economist reports, and the Station Area/Downtown Plan economist was at the first Neighborhood Meeting. Their reports concluded that there is not and will not be a short or medium term demand for commercial uses. The economists recommend public/private programs because of weak market demand. The new implementation program brings the marketing and real estate professionals into that process.

Options 1. Options can be discussed for insertion in the final Plan.

Budget/Financial Impact: 1. This is a study for future implementation. It is anticipated that the Plan will guide future expenditures in the Station Area/Downtown Plan Area. Each recommendation in the implementation program will be separately developed and evaluated for costs and benefits to the community, before making a decision to actually implement it.

2/69 Subcommittee Recommendation N/A The Planning Commission recommended approval on January 20, 2010. Recommended Council Action 1. Staff recommends that the City Council review the Planning Commission recommendations, take additional testimony, and recommend changes to finalize the Station Area/Downtown Plan for public hearing on February 24, 2010. Attachments: 1. Draft Planning Commission minutes recommending approval. 2. Staff report for the January 20, 2010 Station Area/Downtown Plan public hearing 3. Draft Station Area/Downtown Plan, including proposed Commercial Zoning (an appendix to the Station Area/Downtown Plan). cc:

3/69 DRAFT MINUTES Agenda Item 2 Station Area/Downtown Plan Only MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

JANUARY 20, 2010 PUBLIC SESSION: 6:30 p.m. CLOVERDALE SENIOR CENTER, 311 N MAIN STREET, CLOVERDALE, CA 95425

OPENING:  CALL TO ORDER  PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE  ROLL CALL Present: Chair Bennett, Vice Chair Cox, Commissioners Ziegenhagen, Shanahan and Alternate Bagby  AGENDA REVIEW: Planner Lewitter pulled Public Hearing Items Nos. 1 and 2. Chair Bennett changed the order of the agenda, moving the Creekside Extension non-public hearing item as the first agenda item to be heard.  MINUTES REVIEW: Consideration and possible action on Three (3) Sets of minutes: October 26, 2009, November 3, 2009 and November 4, 2009. Action: No changes were recommended. Chair Bennett ordered the minutes to stand as final and adopted.  DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None were declared.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Chair Bennett opened and closed the public comment period. No testimony was received.

NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS

2. Applicant/Property Owner: City of Cloverdale Location: City-Wide Description of project: Consideration and possible action on a Negative Declaration and the Station/Downtown Area Plan. The City, with consultants Freedman, Tung and Sasaki, has developed a plan for the Cloverdale Transit Station/Downtown Area. The Plan examines ridership potential, development concepts, and implementation actions for areas within the Plan Area, generally a ½-mile radius of the existing transit station/train depot. The Plan analyzes the overall project area with respect to access and circulation, existing and alternative land uses, prepares a comprehensive precise plan, and design guidelines and zoning regulations to encourage development in and around the Station/Downtown area. The Plan Area includes the heart of Cloverdale on the west side of Highway 101 encompassing the downtown, adjacent commercial areas and close-by residential properties. The Plan area also includes undeveloped and underdeveloped properties on the east side of Highway 101, which could

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) be developed in the future for Transit Oriented Development and industrial uses, providing housing and jobs near the SMART rail corridor. Environmental Assessment (CEQA): This hearing includes consideration, and possible recommendation for adoption to the City Council, of a proposed Negative Declaration for the Station/Downtown Area Plan.

Planner Kibby presented the staff report. He presented a PowerPoint presentation and handout material that included a resolution recommending to the City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration and Station Area/Downtown Plan. The presentation and handout material is attached to this official record as Exhibit No. 1.

Chair Bennett allowed for technical questions by the Planning Commission of staff and staff provided clarification(s). Items to be followed up with by staff given this technical review are as follows: Commissioner Bagby –Group care facilities should be permitted in residential areas within the Transit Oriented Design areas because it makes sense to locate such a facility near public transit and close to the downtown. Chair Bennett – The City Draft Plan Provisions state “do not allow street frontage parking”. Staff was directed to re-write this to be clearer that the intent is to discourage parking between a building and the street. City Manager Regor –The draft plan should clarify (possibly on page 26) that changes to the off-ramp should be incorporated. Commissioner Ziegenhagen - Design Review must be structured with the process.

Chair Bennett opened the public hearing.

Testimony of Richard St Angelo, Cloverdale: The City will have a difficult time improving the appearance of downtown without Façade Improvement Funds. The plans for a park in the area east of the freeway, and north of the Station, seem to contradict the plans in the area for transit oriented development. The plan for the downtown plaza seems timid and self defeating. He would prefer to see the Plaza extended all the way to First Street. Cloverdale could use a larger downtown plaza.

Testimony of Chris Andersen, Cloverdale: The concept plan for the north anchor limits the amount of economic development potential. She does not support so much public use in the downtown area. There is circulation issues related to truck traffic on Broad Street and the Post office has parking issues. She stated support for a secondary area for public use just outside the downtown core.

Testimony of Marshall Kelly, Cloverdale: The downtown area is not powerful because it lacks a large anchor tenant influence. The problem with the north anchor plan is that it does not provide an anchor. He encouraged the City to look hard at providing anchor tenant spaces. The south anchor plan has only a market, too much residential and no other retail or small shop tenants to help support the market. Most markets do not want the back of their facility facing the street. Testimony of Elissa Morrash, Cloverdale: She recommended that the City talk to local brokers to get input on these plans and the overall concept prior to approving the plan. The economic development benefits concepts and alternatives should be further considered. The uses in the north anchor are not revenue generating. In response to this testimony, staff did explain that the draft Station Area Plan (SAP) does not approve or include the FTS concept plan options. What it does approve is a north and south area. Even though the draft zoning code is attached to the staff report, this action will not approve the zoning code changes.

Chair Bennett closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Review/Opinion: Commissioner Ziegenhagen - Events in the Plaza have brought new life to Cloverdale. The Plaza should not be boxed.

Commissioner Bagby - Liked the term “North Anchor” for the Plaza. The Plaza is the heart of the town. She would prefer to concentrate retail and office activity downtown and would like to see City Hall re- located within walking distance from the downtown. She has witnessed circulation and parking issues along Broad Street. Moving some civic activities would help the downtown become an economic engine.

City Manager Regor commented that staff has heard that the US Postal Service is finding ways to get rid of post offices nation-wide. Staff would hate to give the USPS an excuse to remove the post office from the community entirely.

Commissioner Shanahan –Stated support for the Plan in anticipation of the SMART train.

Vice-Chair Cox –He agreed that the critical areas in the downtown should be retail. Transit Oriented Design should be city-wide and should not be restricted to a half mile radius. The key is good city-wide transit, and to have the downtown plaza more retail oriented to draw people downtown. The concept plan options need to be worked over.

Chair Bennett –The SMART Train is the impetus but this is a broader concept. She stated her support in approval of the broad concept and moving forward.

In conclusion, the Commission directed staff to amend/soften the Station Area Plan hypothesis in regards to the north anchor policy/strategy including civic uses. The Commission would like to see civic uses moved close to, but out of, the downtown core and a long-term transition to retail in the downtown core.

Action: Motion made by Commissioner Ziegenhagen, seconded by Commissioner Bagby, approving the resolution by title only. The vote for approval carried by roll call vote: 5-ayes, 0-noes.

City of Cloverdale Planning Commission Resolution No. 003-2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND STATION AREA/DOWNTOWN PLAN.

Ayes in Favor: Commissioners Ziegenhagen, Bagby, Shanahan, Vice Chair Cox, and Chair Bennett

STUDY SESSION

1. Study Session/Public Workshop on revisions to the commercial provisions of the City of Cloverdale Zoning Ordinance to implement the new 2009 General Plan.

Planner Kibby presented the staff report, summarizing the new proposed Chapter 18.05 of the Zoning Ordinance entitled “Commercial Districts.” A proposed final form will return in approximately one month.

2. Discussion and recommendation to the City Council on conceptual approach to Urban Growth Boundary provisions that could provide permanent open space of lands on the western hillsides.

Planner Kibby presented a PowerPoint presentation attached to the official record as Exhibit No. 2.

Chair Bennett allowed for public comment.

Dave Anderson, of Orinda, CA, addressed the Commission. He has a property currently in the county along the western hillside. The location is spectacular. He first became aware of the City’s concern for development of the western hillside when he began thinking about developing the property. The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) allows for control within the UGB, but there is no control outside of the UGB. This proposal would give the city some control over the western hillside. He explained his development proposal that includes construction of 3 dwelling units. If not approved, his option in the county would be to build an estate home, possibly at 12,000ft elevation. The trade off is that the City can gain control, including design review, and gain open space.

Ray Tyrone, Cloverdale, would like to build a house on the upper part of his property on Cherry Creek Rd. The house pad is already cleared. He would like to subdivide the property where the existing homes are on the lower portion of the site and keep the upper portion of the site for the new home. He envisions this project to be a valuable asset to the City to add potential open space. They could also build in the county.

Elissa Morrash, Cloverdale, supports the height limit. A digital representation of the properties might be of assistance to gain a better sense of what they are proposing.

Chair Bennett closed the public comment period.

The Commission discussed the proposal for an exception area for permanent open space, and commented as follows: Vice Chair Cox, and Commissioners Shanahan and Ziegenhagen were inclined to uphold the established hillside protection policies. Chair Bennett had concerns with long-term impacts of such a change, but felt the concept of total control and open space acquisition is enticing.

Commissioner Bagby would consider the proposal because it offers more control and an unprecedented opportunity to gain open space. Digital representations of units must be required. Requirements setting guidelines for such development should be created. Cloverdale should be assured that the designated open space is appropriate and is open to the public for use, not just for view. Any houses should have water catchment facilities and permeable driveways.

Director Kibby will forward the discussion points on to the City Council.

ADJOURNMENT: Chair adjourned the meeting at 8:56 to the next meeting, Wednesday, February 3, 2010 or an alternate date if directed, at 6:30 p.m., Cloverdale Senior Center, 311 N. Main Street, Cloverdale, CA.

AGENDA ITEM No. 3 City of Cloverdale Planning Commission Staff Report

Meeting Date: January 20, 2010 Applicant: City of Cloverdale Property Owner: Citywide

Project Location: Citywide. The Plan Area includes the heart of Cloverdale on the west side of Highway 101 encompassing the downtown, adjacent commercial areas and close-by residential properties. The Plan area also includes undeveloped and underdeveloped properties on the east side of Highway 101, which could be developed in the future for Transit Oriented Development and industrial uses, providing housing and jobs near the SMART rail corridor. Project Description: Consideration and possible action on a Negative Declaration and the Station/Downtown Area Plan. Zoning Designation: Various Zones. General Plan Designation: Various General Plan designations Environmental Assessment: This hearing includes consideration, and possible recommendation for adoption to the City Council, of a proposed Negative Declaration for the Station/Downtown Area Plan.

A. Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Commission hold public hearing and recommend approval of the Station Area/Downtown Plan to the City Council.

B. Project Description

The City, with consultants Freedman, Tung and Sasaki, has developed a plan for the Cloverdale Transit Station/Downtown Area. The Plan examines ridership potential, development concepts, and implementation actions for areas within the Plan Area, generally a ½-mile radius of the existing transit station/train depot. The Plan analyzes the overall project area with respect to access and circulation, existing and alternative land uses, prepares a comprehensive precise plan, and design guidelines and zoning regulations to encourage development in and around the Station/Downtown area.

C. Analysis The Station Area/Downtown Plan was developed after three public input meetings, held by the City and Freedman, Tung, and Sasaki (FTS), economic consultant Mundie and Associates, and traffic/parking consultants Nelson Nygaard and Associates. In addition to the Station Area/Downtown Plan process, the City cooperated with the Urban Land Institute 2009 TOD marketplace. The ULI prepared recommendations to encourage Transit Oriented Development (TOD) for six Bay Area cities. The ULI team included architect, economist, legal, and housing market inputs.

The final plan was written by City staff using the input from FTS and ULI studies. Most Station Area Plans have been prepared for larger cities or for neighborhoods within larger cities. Those plans typically propose high density housing to provide rapid transit riders. The goal for the SMART system is 2,200 dwelling units within a half mile of the station. The goal for inner cities (e.g. BART) is 3,500 dwelling units within a half mile.

The City of Cloverdale currently has 3,400 total units (Department of Finance estimate), and 500 units in the Station Area/Downtown Plan area (ABAG estimate). Anticipated growth is 900 more units to be built by 2035 (ABAG estimate). The General Plan allows 1,300 new units by 2025. Under either scenario, the City will not be able to reach 2,200 units within a half mile of the station.

Because Cloverdale cannot reach the concentration of units, the plan emphasizes and has several policies that encourage the broad community to use the SMART train, including encouraging close-in development, improving the pedestrian environment to encourage walking more than a half mile to the station, requiring any development north and south of the City to support operations of the City bus so that it coordinates with the SMART schedule, and encouraging visitor uses to use the City bus as a shuttle, rather than operating separate shuttle operations.

Attachment A is a comparison chart of Freedman Tung and Sasaki, ULI, Station Area/Downtown Plan, and Plan Implementation programs.

Attachments

Attachment A is a comparison chart of Freedman Tung and Sasaki, ULI, Station Area/Downtown Plan, and Plan Implementation programs.

Attachment B is a comparison of FTS zoning recommendations and proposed zoning standards.

Under separate cover. Station Area/Downtown Plan. Attachment A. Plan Recommendation, FTS and ULI Recommendation, and Implementation Program (Note, on Implementation Programs, number #1 programs are 0-1 year, #2 programs are 0-2 years, #3 programs are 2-5 years, and #4 programs are 5-10 year implementation)

Plan Recommendation Freedman, Tung & Sasaki ULI Recommendation City Draft Plan Provisions City Implementation Recommendation A. Establish Cloverdale as a No Recommendation. FTS Cloverdale should be a model Establish Cloverdale as a small This is an overall goal, Transit Oriented City focused on the Station Area for TOD in the future. town TOD model. implemented by all other Plan only. implementation actions. Balance of Station Area/ Downtown Plan policies should support this goal B. Establish Downtown & Current economy does not Current economy does not Place an emphasis on the 1.a. Design a project Station as a catalyst for support new retail or lodging support new retail use or high downtown in order to attract evaluation system to review citywide growth use. Residential demand is density residential use. new businesses -- because the public and economic benefits weak but will be the first to Lodging could be a niche downtown is an indicator of of city expenditures and to recover. opportunity. sound governance and public choose those with the greatest commitment to the City. benefit. It is possible to look at niche development (housing, Develop a planning framework 1.e. Integrate Station supermarket, lodging, retail) so that public spending on any Area/Downtown Plan into the even though the “normal” project will meet multiple Redevelopment 5-year plan. market for those uses may be economic goals. 1.g. Develop public/private weak. Use public/private partnerships partnerships to support to move ahead in a down housing in TOD area, and first economy and also to attract floor retail in the DTC Zone. niche businesses. 1.h. Identify and encourage Develop a public and economic niche markets such as housing, evaluation system, so that the lodging, retail, visitor uses. return for public investment exceeds the public cost. C. Develop a Compact, Transit- Establish a DTC Zone to move Agree with the FTS directions Establish a DTC Zone to move 1.b. Revise GP and Zoning to Oriented Downtown the downtown core to the without specifically calling out the downtown core to the conform to Plan policies south. policies. south, between Second Street 1.c. GP policy to require and Citrus Fair Drive. DTC Zone north of second outlying development and Plan Recommendation Freedman, Tung & Sasaki ULI Recommendation City Draft Plan Provisions City Implementation Recommendation street should be retail support Establish DTS Zone north of visitor uses to support the City area (office & residential) Second Street as downtown Bus support area. Change Commercial Street and 1.d. Adopt growth Main Street frontages to Change Commercial Street and management program to Downtown Neighborhood Zone Main Street frontages to O-R encourage close-in growth and (mainly residential) zone. Retain existing O-R. outlying developments to support ongoing support of City Bus. D. Increase Daytime Establish TOD Core zone south Support for FTS plans to Establish TOD zone south of 1.b. Revise GP and Zoning to Population for downtown retail of the downtown with high support downtown. the downtown with high conform to plan. and for transit support density residential, medical, density residential, medical, Densities should be 6-15 units 1.g. Develop public/private office, and lodging uses. office, and lodging uses. per acre to maintain the City partnerships to support Allow high density residential character. Allow residential and office housing in TOD area, and first and office uses above first floor uses above first floor in the floor retail in the DTC in the DTC zone and DTS zones. DTC and DTS zones. Retain residential uses close-in TOD, DTC, DTS densities of 20 to downtown with Downtown units per acre. Neighborhood zoning. Retain residential uses close-in TOD, DTC, DTS densities 20-40 to downtown, using the units per acre. existing O-R zone. Establish Neighborhood Neighborhood Boulevard Area Boulevard zoning at both is a design review area, but not entrances to downtown with a zoning district. housing, medical office, No proposals to establish TOD lodging. Neighborhood and Riverfront Establish TOD Neighborhood Workplace zones. Zoning east, west, and south of TOD Core. Establish Riverfront Workplace Zoning east of the freeway. E. Strengthen the downtown Concentrate activity generating Focus on downtown oriented Retain existing anchor and high 1.a. Design a project as the heart of the City, with uses in the core downtown. development. traffic public uses. evaluation system to review business, entertainment, civic, public and economic benefits Plan Recommendation Freedman, Tung & Sasaki ULI Recommendation City Draft Plan Provisions City Implementation Recommendation housing, & employment Reserve first floor for retail Encourage building forms that of city expenditures and to generators. uses. encourage first floor retail and choose those with the greatest do not allow street frontage benefit. Retain essential services like parking. City Hall and Post Office 1.b. Revise GP and Zoning to downtown. Zoning has limits on first floor conform to plan. office but does not prohibit Consider business recruitment 2.a. Encourage projects of them. and relocation incentive opportunity with public/ programs. Create a physical setting that private partnerships. encourages longer customer visits to several businesses F. Provide North and South Anchor the north and south Encourage the Citrus Fair to Provide a north anchor –most 2.b. Prepare south anchor Anchors to the Downtown ends of the retail core. move to another location. likely civic center uses. master plan. Require liner retail (small shops Provide a south anchor (uses 2.c. Prepare north anchor on street frontages if a large not designated) on the Citrus concept plan for civic uses. use is proposed). Fair/Thyme Square site 4.b. Start work on the south Citrus Fair/Thyme Square sites anchor. as southern anchor. 4.c. Redevelop the north anchor. G. Create a strong Pedestrian opening in the Pedestrian opening in the Pedestrian opening in the 1.f. Refine design concept, transportation network to sound wall between Tarman sound wall between Tarman sound wall between Tarman define preferred option, connect the entire City to and Citrus Fair Drive. and Citrus Fair Drive. and Citrus Fair Drive. prepare design and cost SMART and Downtown estimates. Create a Cloverdale greenway Create a Cloverdale greenway Create a Cloverdale greenway using half of the Citrus Fair using half of the Citrus Fair using half of the Citrus Fair 2d. Work with CALTRANS to undercrossing. Two options undercrossing. The undercrossing. Two options finalize concept. proposed for the Cloverdale realignment of Cloverdale proposed for the Cloverdale 3.a. Provide pedestrian openint Boulevard area. Boulevard option is Boulevard area. in the sound wall. recommended. Focus Cloverdale Transit to 4.a. Develop the Cloverdale bring residents to the Greenway. Cloverdale Depot when trains arrive and leave. Require outlying developments to provide ongoing funding and visitor uses to coordinate or Plan Recommendation Freedman, Tung & Sasaki ULI Recommendation City Draft Plan Provisions City Implementation Recommendation use the City Bus as shuttle. Use Form-Base zoning and FTS proposed a Form Based Downtown type building in the Existing zoning modified to 1.b. Revise GP and Zoning to standards to create an Code for six proposed Zoning core and appropriate higher achieve the principles of the conform to plan. investment friendly downtown Districts. density design in the TOD core FTS recommendation. These area. include design for first floor retail in the DTC Zone, residential inspired design in the O-R zone and Downtown Neighborhood design district, and urban-type Maintain and improve the built Maintain fine grain residential Preserve Cloverdale’s small Continue the commitment to 1.a. Design a project environment, including to the east and west of the town atmosphere. responding to change without evaluation system to review entrances, highway frontages, downtown. changing City character (e.g. public and economic benefits streetscapes, and sidewalks. Cloverdale Boulevard cleanup of city expenditures and to Encourage Mendocino Coast Encourage visitors to the after Highway 101 choose those with the greatest visitors to go through Mendocino Coast to use the realignment). benefit. downtown to Highway 128. Citrus Fair exit. Use “Mendocino Coast” 1.i. Use “Mendocino Coast” directional signage to directional signage to encourage visitors to go encourage visitors to go through downtown to Highway through downtown to Highway 128. 128. Use shared parking to Nelson/Nygard traffic & No specific recommendations Continue shared parking 1.b. Revise GP and Zoning to encourage pedestrian and parking consultant program in downtown and add conform to plan. bicycle access to the depot and recommends: shared parking to TOD Core downtown zone. Manage Downtown Parking Unbundle parking costs Residential parking permits or parking benefit district Require parking cash out Guaranteed ride home Universal Transit Passes Paid parking at the Depot Coordinate local and regional transportation Plan Recommendation Freedman, Tung & Sasaki ULI Recommendation City Draft Plan Provisions City Implementation Recommendation Land uses east of the depot Establish Riverfront Workplace Encourage appropriate uses Improve Asti Road frontages No individual implementation and TOD Neighborhood Zoning but don’t conflict with the and bicycle/pedestrian paths programs. east of the freeway downtown. No zoning changes proposed; however, site should be monitored if flood plain or other changes occur City of Cloverdale Zoning Ordinance Commercial Districts Appendix B. Comparison of FTS and proposed zoning provisions Proposed Zoning Freedman, Tung, and Sasaki Proposal Zoning Ordinance Proposal District DTC Downtown Land Use Land Use Commercial District Ground floor retail shopfronts. Ground floor retail and small office uses. Housing, office, lodging above Housing, office, lodging above.

Building Requirements Building Requirements Maximum number of stories –3 stories Maximum number of stories –3 stories and 4 in landmark locations

Minimum height –20 feet Minimum number of stories –2 stories

Development at back of sidewalk Minimum/maximum setback –0 feet

Urban frontage treatment wide Use Cloverdale Boulevard frontage sidewalks, trees, pedestrian scale standards streetlights.

Form based design standards. Form based design standards for street level retail and for upper stories. DTS Downtown Included in DTC District. The primary Land Use Support District difference being that ground floor Housing, office, lodging and retail uses. retail is not required north of Second Street. Building Requirements Maximum number of stories –3 stories

Minimum number of stories –2 stories

Minimum/maximum setback –0 feet

Use Cloverdale Boulevard frontage standards

Form based design standards for street level retail and for upper stories. TOD Core District Land Use Land Use Housing, office, lodging , with limited Housing, office, lodging , public uses retail Limited retail only with a city sponsored catalyst project.

Building Requirements Building Requirements Maximum number of stories –3 stories Maximum number of stories –3 stories and 4 in landmark locations

February 28, 1995 - Page 24 Minimum number of stories –2 stories Minimum number of stories –2 stories

Development close to sidewalks Development close to sidewalks

Urban frontage treatment wide Urban frontage treatment wide sidewalks, trees, pedestrian scale sidewalks, trees, pedestrian scale streetlights. streetlights.

Form based design standards. Limited form based design standards. O-R District (FTS Land Use Land Use proposed Fine Grain residential, office, and Residential, office, and housing with Downtown lodging. existing houses as the design model. Neighborhood District) Building Requirements Building Requirements Maximum number of stories –2.5 Maximum number of stories –2 stories. stories.

Setbacks based on adjacent housing. Setbacks are residential equivalent Development close to sidewalks setbacks.

Urban frontage treatment wide Not specified. Most improvements are sidewalks, trees, pedestrian scale already done. streetlights. Re-use of existing housing is preferred to demolition and new construction. Flexibility of standards is allowed for re-use.

Historic preservation standards apply. Neighborhood Land Use Land Use Boulevard design Housing, Medical Office, and Lodging. Underlying zoning applies, mostly R-3 standards (FTS (high density residential and G-C proposed a zoning (General Commercial) district.) Building Requirements Building Requirements Maximum number of stories –3 stories As specified in underlying zone.

Building designs must front on Building designs must front on Cloverdale Boulevard. Cloverdale Boulevard.

Grand Boulevard Building Massing. Use large houses (e.g. houses on Cloverdale Boulevard north of downtown) as model.

Urban frontage treatment wide No provisions. sidewalks, trees in planter strips with

February 28, 1995 - Page 25 formal landscaping, boulevard scale street lights. ATTACHMENT 3 Station Area and Downtown Precise Plan

City of Cloverdale

February 28, 1995 - Page 26 exi

Exhibit 1. Station Area Plan Boundaries

February 28, 1995 - Page 27 Table of Contents

Plan Summary History Vision Book 1 Transit Oriented Development Strategy Book 2 Development Regulations Book 3 Implementation/Revitalization Strategies

Exhibit 2 SMART Passenger Rail Corridor

February 28, 1995 - Page 28 PLAN SUMMARY The Cloverdale Station Area/Downtown Plan is a guide for integrating the City and the new passenger rail service to the Cloverdale Depot, with a particular emphasis on the depot, the opportunity development sites at Citrus Fair Drive and Cloverdale Boulevard, and the Cloverdale Downtown. Below is a list of the City’s primary goals discussed in the Plan. 1 Establish Cloverdale as a transit oriented city so that all residents have exceptional access to the Cloverdale Depot and serve as a regional model for small towns that are served by passenger rail. The Sonoma Marin Rail Transit District (SMART) standards propose an average density of 2,200 Deleted: Most station area plans are dwelling units within walking distance of the station. Cloverdale is not likely to achieve that based on a minimum density, so the plan proposes to provide the ridership equivalent of 2,200 units or more by providing exceptional access from the entire City to the station area and downtown. 2 Establish the downtown and station area as a catalyst for citywide economic growth. The quality of the downtown shows prospective businesses that the City has the organization and capacity to support new businesses, both in and outside the downtown. The plan proposes public/private partnerships to attract new business, and evaluation procedures to meet multiple economic goals with each project, including return on investment, leveraging of funds, and public benefits with each project. 3 Create a compact transit and pedestrian oriented downtown by developing a concentrated retail core, in order to provide a setting where residents and office workers will support downtown business and protect existing close-in residential areas. 4 Increase the resident population and number of office workers around the downtown core to support retail business and also to provide a population and workforce within walking distance of the Cloverdale Depot. 5 Implement Zoning Ordinance and General Plan amendments that strengthen the downtown core with pedestrian oriented design and policies that encourage first floor retail consistent with summary points 3, 4, and 5. (The Zoning Ordinance is undergoing a comprehensive revision, and the Station Area/Downtown Plan recommendations will be incorporated.) 6 Provide north and south anchors to the downtown. The north anchor will probably be Civic Center. The South anchor will be commercial and housing. These will be higher traffic uses and will provide a finite boundary to the retail comparison shopping core. 7 Create a strong pedestrian, bicycle, and local transit network to support the Cloverdale Depot and the Downtown via the following: a) Develop the Cloverdale Greenway, a pedestrian/bicycle linear park between the station and the downtown, using two lanes of the Citrus Fair Boulevard undercrossing. b) Provide an opening in the sound wall between Tarman Tract and Citrus Fair Drive freeway onramp, so that 320 houses (nearly 900 residents) have direct access to the Depot. c) Require outlying areas north and south of the City and visitor destinations to support the City Bus with capital and operating funds, so the bus coordinates with SMART extended schedules. 8 Use form base zoning concepts in the citywide Zoning Ordinance revision to improve appearance of new development and to provide economic certainty to developers. 9 Maintain and improve the built environment in Cloverdale, continuing a longstanding policy of keeping up-to-date with market demands and existing uses, but without allowing obsolete uses to guide future land use patterns.

February 28, 1995 - Page 29 10 Use shared parking downtown and in Transit Oriented Development (TOD) areas so that each parking space serves multiple uses and to encourage downtown customers to park once and walk to several businesses.

HISTORY As with most cities, transportation and Cloverdale’s history are intertwined. Cloverdale served as a transportation hub from the construction of the first tavern in 1856 to the opening of the 101 Freeway in 1994. Cloverdale is ideally situated to be a transportation hub. It is located at the northern end of the Alexander Valley, the ideal stopping point before making a trek from the level valley floor into the hills -- north, east, or west. In 1856, Richard Markle and W. J. Miller took advantage of Cloverdale’s location and opened a trading post, store, and tavern on the pack trail that went from the valley floor through the hills to Ukiah and Humboldt. Markle and Miller’s interests were bought by James Kleiser in 1859. Kleiser is considered to be the founder of Cloverdale. He considered roads to be the key to future development. In the 1860’s and 70’s, stagecoach roads were constructed north to Ukiah, south to Healdsburg, and east to Lake County. New residents came and started to farm the rich soil around Cloverdale. In 1872, the San Francisco and North Pacific Railroad was extended from Healdsburg to Cloverdale, with a service frequency of three trains per day. The train carried agricultural products to the Bay Area and also brought visitors to destination hotels, resorts, and the Preston community. Early agricultural products were oranges, lemons, pears, prunes, hops, wine grapes, dairy products, and, for a short time, tobacco. Orange groves deserve mention because the Cloverdale Citrus Fair was started in the 1890’s and continues today. Hundreds of Fair visitors rode the train every year to Cloverdale. In general, the train was the primary transportation to and from Cloverdale until the 1920’s, and, still a major carrier until after World War II. Passenger trains ran until 1958. In 1919, California Route 1 (later 101) was completed to Cloverdale from Healdsburg. In response to growing automobile traffic, restaurants, service stations, and motor courts sprung up along the highway. Ultimately, there were six motor courts and 40-50 gas stations. Population was less than 1,000 before the war and 3,000 after the war. After World War II, lumber products became the major industry. Cloverdale had more than a dozen sawmills and lumber operations. Logs and finished lumber were carried by rail and truck, until freight rail service was discontinued in the 1990’s. Five lumber processing operations still exist in Cloverdale. Wine grapes became the major agricultural product. The Italian Swiss Colony was the largest table wine producer in the world, and one of California’s largest tourist destinations. It had more than 400,000 visitors in 1962. As Cloverdale and Statewide traffic grew, Cloverdale became a well-known bottleneck on highway 101. The traffic signal at First Street and Cloverdale Boulevard was the first traffic light north of San Francisco. Delays on holiday weekends were legendary. In 1994, the 101 Freeway bypass was constructed after 45 years of planning. As a part of that construction, the train tracks were removed and the Cloverdale train depot was redeveloped. The tracks and the new train depot were relocated on the east side of the freeway, away from the downtown. .The freeway now separates the station from the developed part of the City.

February 28, 1995 - Page 30 From 1995-2005, new housing construction was a major economic activity, supported in large part by freeway access to the south. Population grew from 4,924 in 1990 to 8,577 in 2008. Nearly 60% of residents commute out of Cloverdale for work. The number of in-city jobs has remained static. Cloverdale had been planning for the 101 freeway bypass for more than 45 years. Both the 1957 and 1993 General Plans anticipated land use policies to concentrate the City’s commercial activity in two centers, rather than maintaining the auto-oriented strip commercial that served the State Highway (Cloverdale Boulevard). In the 1990’s the City rezoned most of the Boulevard from commercial to residential, actively removed the most unattractive highway-oriented uses, and beautified both Cloverdale Boulevard and First Street in the downtown. The City retained close-in residential to the downtown, so that many residents walk, rather than drive to services. The City developed downtown shared parking standards and started to develop pedestrian-oriented design standards for downtown. Finally, the City has provided higher-density affordable housing in walkable distance to the Downtown and the Cloverdale Depot. The Station Area/Downtown Plan builds on those previous actions and creates a new planning goal to integrate both the Downtown and the entire City with the passenger rail experience when passenger rail returns in 2014. Cloverdale will serve as an anchor to the SMART system and will again be a transportation hub at the northern end of the Alexander Valley.

February 28, 1995 - Page 31 BOOK 1. TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

Proposed Station Area Plan

February 28, 1995 - Page 32 Exhibit 3 Proposed Station Area Plan Land Use Strategy

February 28, 1995 - Page 33 1 Vision. A Transit Oriented City Cloverdale is the northern anchor of the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) passenger rail system. The vision of the Station Area/Downtown Plan is to integrate Cloverdale with the SMART rail system in order to create a transit oriented city, and to support a regional transportation and economic network that provides mutual benefit to the City and the Region:  by improving access to destinations within and outside the City  by improving the City economy by increased traffic to access local businesses  by improving mutual economic integration and benefit within the SMART service area  by identifying unique ways that a small city with a focus on transportation can provide the ridership strategies that equal or exceed the high density solutions of more populous areas  by demonstrating concrete ways for lower density cities to reduce automobile generated greenhouse gases. Because of the station location, the transit oriented city also works to revitalize the downtown. The Plan creates a far more livable City for Cloverdale residents:  by emphasizing and supporting the traditional downtown as the City core  by maintaining close-in residential areas with walking access to downtown  by overcoming physical obstacles which limit pedestrian access to the Cloverdale Station  by focusing growth on the City core  by improving and enhancing local transit so that residents have an alternative to using automobiles to reach services and the Cloverdale Station. The Station Area Plan also serves as a Cloverdale Downtown Plan, with a goal of providing a physical structure to revitalize the downtown, where the physical attributes will support an increase in business and a place to gather, enjoy, and reinforce the close knit unity that Cloverdale residents already feel toward their City. The heart of the downtown plan is a concentrated core, which provides activity generators attractive to pedestrians; opportunities for close-in residential and office uses to provide downtown customers; and continuation of the beautification process started with the Cloverdale Boulevard and First Street streetscape projects; and to 2 Building the Vision –what the community wants a) Establish Cloverdale as a Transit Oriented City, with a whole-city contribution to transit ridership Most Station Area Plans anticipate the creation of high density housing and services near the station. The SMART system anticipates an average of 2,200 or more housing units within walking distance of each station. Cloverdale is not likely to achieve that density because the station is separated from the developed portion of the City by a freeway and because the land adjoining the station is in a flood plain and in industrial use. Within a half-mile radius of a station, most cities will have 400-500 acres of land available for station-supportive uses. Cloverdale has less than 200 available acres. Also, Cloverdale has 3,400 existing housing units,

February 28, 1995 - Page 34 mostly lower density. The Station Area Plan Economics Study has indicated that Cloverdale will not have a sizeable demand for high-density market-rate housing in the station area, and the main potential for high density housing is city-supported affordable units. ABAG estimates there are 501 houses in the Station Area Plan within walking distance of the station, and that approximately 488 new units will be built by 2025 (the General Plan end date) and 1,052 new Deleted: 550 units will be built by 2035. The Station Area/Downtown Plan proposes to provide the ridership equivalent to 2,200 or more housing units by designing a compelling pedestrian environment which will attract pedestrians from beyond the traditional half-mile radius and to use multiple funding sources to improve the local bus system (Cloverdale Transit) to provide exceptional service to the Cloverdale Station and to the Downtown. b) Use the Downtown and Station as the catalyst for citywide economic development When new businesses seek to locate in a new city, they usually check the downtown as well as their potential site. A clean and safe downtown indicates that the city government is effective and has the discipline and efficiency to maintain its core. In addition, an attractive downtown indicates that the city has a strong community service base, because downtowns traditionally provide the bulk of community and public service facilities. It also shows whether residents have pride in the community. These community indicators demonstrate the potential for a good customer base and workforce which have the ability to support new businesses. Because the downtown is such a strong indicator of the city’s ability to attract business, many cities place a higher level of public investment in the downtown than other areas. That emphasis does not usually take away from other portions of the City because the downtown serves as a catalyst for citywide private development. The Cloverdale Depot adds another and exciting dimension to the downtown, with the ability to attract downtown-supportive housing and with the potential to bring and focus visitors on the downtown. The City’s economic development activities are based on the principle that any project developed in the Station Area/Downtown Plan area should support multiple and citywide goals, not just the single purpose embodied in the project itself.  Planning framework. A planning framework should look at the plan policies and implementation and setting priorities based on meeting multiple objectives. It is the goal to achieve multiple financial and planning objectives from each City economic development program e.g., the housing program funding provides housing, supports a progression to help clients move to progressively better housing and job assistance to help move from assisted to private housing).  Economic Development program. In order to move forward in a slow economy, the economic development priorities in the Station Area/Downtown Plan are based on public/private partnerships, using redevelopment, housing, and grant funds as a catalyst to attract new investment and to support new and existing businesses in the downtown.  Finance program. The implementation program has two specific ways to use limited City funds to support new projects and/or tax revenues. First is to leverage City funds to support a more valuable project (e.g. the housing program has a goal of $10 private dollars spent for each public dollar spent). Second is return on investment, supporting

February 28, 1995 - Page 35 projects that provide ongoing tax revenues (e.g. sales tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, or tax increment).  Public benefit evaluation, using quantitative evaluation wherever possible, to compare the relative benefits of City funding to determine if goals are met. For example assistance to public events could be evaluated by cost per attendee, façade improvement by increase in jobs and tax revenues, and housing by ability to assist local employees and progression to market rate housing, and leveraging or return on investment so that city investment achieves much larger goals. c) Create a compact, transit and pedestrian-oriented Downtown After the 1993 General Plan, the City removed large stretches of strip commercial zoning on Cloverdale Boulevard, because the 101 freeway bypass directed traffic around the City. It was anticipated that the commercial needs of the City would be met by the Downtown and Furber Plaza Center. Some areas of commercial potential still remained, including the large vacant site south of the Citrus Fair. The Station Area/Downtown Plan economic study indicates that the City still has more commercial zoning than can reasonably be absorbed in the long term future. Also, the Plan background studies identified that the core downtown, intended for pedestrian oriented comparison shopping was too large, and pedestrians typically do comparison shopping where retail businesses are frequent and in a compact area. In order to keep the downtown compact for pedestrian use, the land with DTC (Downtown Core) zoning will be reduced in size and moved to the south to be closer to the Cloverdale Station. The area north of Second Street will be rezoned to Downtown Support (DTS), which allows a wide variety of downtown support uses, including types of retail that are not necessarily pedestrian oriented uses desired in the downtown core. The lands with existing residential uses east and west of the downtown will be rezoned to the Office Residential (O-R) District, which will continue the residential “feel” of close-in downtown neighborhoods, while also allowing residential, office, and lodging uses to support the downtown core. The large and largely vacant area south of downtown, including the Thyme Square and Citrus Fair Sites, will be changed to Transit Oriented Development (TOD) zoning which removes a large area from General Commercial zoning and provides opportunity for high density residential use as well as office, public, and lodging uses to support the downtown. With those zoning changes, the downtown has the limited size appropriate to pedestrian oriented commercial. d) Increase the daytime and resident population of the Downtown Core and TOD Core residents in order to support downtown businesses and to provide transit ridership Both transit ridership and downtown retail need a dense customer base in order to succeed. The Station Area/Downtown Plan proposes to increase the number and density of people in the Plan area by attracting daytime uses, particularly offices which will arrive by transit and shop in the downtown during the day, and by construction of higher density housing to provide residents who will support the downtown day and night and who will walk to transit rather than driving to work. Residents who drive to work typically do their shopping out of the City. Residents who ride transit do not have the option to stop at car-oriented retail centers when going to and from work. Prime opportunity sites in the TOD (Transit Oriented Development) District, at the intersection

February 28, 1995 - Page 36 of Citrus Fair Drive and Cloverdale Boulevard provide the best short-term opportunity for high- density residential uses that will support the Cloverdale Station and Downtown. They also provide a secondary opportunity for destination uses that can provide jobs and services for uses that cannot find appropriate locations downtown. The Downtown Core and Downtown Support zoning provide opportunities for housing and office use. Both uses add to the daytime and nighttime customer base. Also, the provisions for O-R zoning surrounding the downtown will preserve existing close-in housing, which already provides a strong pedestrian base. e) Strengthen the downtown as the Heart of the City by fostering a strong core of business, entertainment, civic, housing, and employment generators The Station Area/Downtown Plan is specifically designed to keep existing anchor businesses and public uses, and to assure that future development is designed to support core businesses. The Plan’s northern anchor anticipates existing and expanded civic uses, which generate pedestrian activity in the downtown. The primary strength of a pedestrian-oriented downtown is that the downtown contains a variety of activities and services which are more diverse than can be provided in any other part of the City. This includes small first floor retail with frequent shop windows, upper story residential and office uses to provide services to residents and a customer base for first floor retail, close-in residential to provide customers within walking distance, lodging, arts and entertainment, and public/quasi-public services to provide a broad and exciting experience for anyone visiting the downtown. The Cloverdale downtown streetscape improvements, installed 2002 and 2009, have created an attractive pedestrian environment. Families stroll along the well designed sidewalks, even when no businesses are open, so the stage is set to bring in more pedestrian oriented, activity generating businesses to an existing pedestrian oriented environment. Customers will typically walk greater distances if they expect to spend longer time at a destination. An anecdotal rule of thumb is that pedestrians will walk one block for each hour spent in the downtown, with a typical maximum of 3-4 blocks for a four hour stay. Therefore, the goal of the Downtown Plan is to create a physical setting to support longer visits. The key to a pedestrian downtown is a compact retail core with multiple destinations, so that customers can park once, arrive by transit, or walk from neighboring residential areas and fulfill a variety of shopping, service, and entertainment needs in a single visit. This will work if destinations are close together and if the pedestrian experience walking between destinations is enjoyable. In order to keep destinations close together, the Downtown Plan emphasizes a compact retail core, from Second Street to Citrus Fair Drive. The areas surrounding this compact core will emphasize downtown support activities, but not necessarily the building forms needed for pedestrian shopping. In order to make walking between destinations enjoyable, the pedestrian core emphasizes frequent shop fronts, recessed entrance doorways, display windows which provide interesting change of view when walking at pedestrian speeds, and signs for pedestrian information on the first floor. The Plan prohibits the first floor building forms and uses which discourage Deleted: street frontage pedestrians, parking, between the back of sidewalk and building frontage, parking which Deleted:

February 28, 1995 - Page 37 requires a curb cut across a pedestrian sidewalk, opaque building frontages, long frontages with the same use, and very low traffic uses. f) Provide a north and south anchor to the downtown core The plan encourages anchor uses to the north and south of the downtown core. These uses are encouraged in the core itself, but may be located adjacent to the core if property is not available within the core. The purpose of the anchor uses will be to create a boundary to the downtown, to attract a high volume of customers or visitors and set a quality design standard. The anchor buildings will help shape the intervening downtown spaces into good places that can be remembered, where people are comfortable walking by and also using downtown buildings. One of the anchor uses will be a civic center with city hall and associated public service uses, which bring many residents and customers downtown. The civic center could be located north or south, but the preferred location would be to the north with a civic center and the plaza as a location because it is the current city hall location. The northern anchor site is also a strong boundary to the downtown and also provides a transition point to other downtown-support activities such as the Performing Arts Center and the History Center. The second anchor use would generate large numbers of customers or visitors on a daily basis, who will then continue to downtown shops. The design of the south anchor should be an inspiration for good design throughout the downtown. A necessary part of the anchor would be a grand entrance to Cloverdale Boulevard which firmly establishes a southern limit to the downtown. g) Create a strong transportation network to connect the downtown and the community to the SMART train depot and to improve community access to the downtown. Physical limitations do not currently allow transit supporting development in more than half of the lands close to the depot. (land directly east of the depot). The Plan proposes specific ways to encourage pedestrians and bicyclists access within and just outside a ring of a half-mile radius. The plan supports attractive and enjoyable ideas that provide full-city access to the Cloverdale Depot and Downtown. The first step is to provide a pedestrian opening in the sound wall between Tarman Tract and Citrus Fair Drive. The walk from Tarman to the Cloverdale Depot will then be direct and straightforward, rather than requiring residents to go to Cloverdale Boulevard and then retracing much of that same trip on Citrus Fair Drive. The Tarman “Hole in the Wall”will add 320 households (nearly 900 residents) with direct access to the station, even though some are outside a half mile radius. The second major step is to create a Cloverdale Greenway –a linear park utilizing one half of the Citrus Fair freeway undercrossing as a pedestrian and bicycle park to encourage walking between the Downtown and the Cloverdale Station. The Greenway will be a strong and attractive reminder that the Station can be conveniently and safely accessed by foot or bicycle. It will also be a way to extend the pedestrian access envelope along the beautified downtown street frontages to the residential areas surrounding downtown, even though some of those are outside the half-mile radius. A final major step will be to focus the Cloverdale Transit links on the Downtown and Cloverdale Station and to require outlying residential developments and visitor attractions to support a single transit net. Within the limits of funding, transit service should interface with SMART train

February 28, 1995 - Page 38 stops, so that residents and visitors can reach Cloverdale destinations without use of a car. If possible, Cloverdale Transit buses should be distinctive, so that the bus ride can be enjoyable, rather than the least desirable part of the journey. Developments to the north and south of existing City limits and major visitor destinations should fund bus service from their developments to Downtown and the Cloverdale Station and should also augment the existing in- city bus service. Proprietary bus service, with buses only for customers of a development or destination, is discouraged in favor of citywide bus service. h) Utilize Modified form-based zoning and development standards to create an investment friendly planning environment Downtowns are unique urban environments because they contain such a wide variety of opportunities and land uses. This variety can be a magnet for customers, new businesses, and new construction if managed properly. It can also be a deterrent because of the potential that a neighboring business or building might be changed to inappropriate design or use. The Plan proposes modified form-based zoning which would develop predictable physical form and predictable land use approvals. Form based design standards assure fast and predictable city processing and approval, because the design priorities are already identified, and most new business uses will be permitted if they support the pedestrian oriented land use policies. The Station Area/Downtown Plan Economic Report indicates that new private investment in commercial uses will be limited unless that development is supported by public/private partnerships and investment in higher density housing is supported by public/private funding. i) Maintain and improve the design of the built environment. Improve the appearance of entries and approaches to the downtown and the community. Maintain attractive highway frontages, well designed streetscapes and sidewalks. Provide signage to attract visitors. The Cloverdale built environment reflects a long-standing commitment to good design, encouragement of up to date business, and removal of obsolete land use patterns. The most striking example of that commitment is the fifteen-year improvement program for Cloverdale Boulevard after the 101 freeway bypass was built. Highway oriented strip commercial zoning and uses were changed along the entire length of the Boulevard, and the Cloverdale Boulevard beautification project changed the downtown from a four-lane automobile boulevard into a traffic calmed street which favors pedestrians and pedestrian-oriented businesses. The Station Area/Downtown Plan will continue that commitment to a city that maintains its small-town character, but is also responsive to the changing standards of design, economic development, and land use. The Plan proposes freeway signage that will direct visitors traveling to the Mendocino Coast to exit at downtown/Citrus Fair, rather than using the north Cloverdale freeway exit. Signage should identify the exit as a way to reach the Mendocino Coast, rather than to reach Highway 128, so that only visitor traffic will enter the downtown. The Citrus Fair/Downtown route is shorter than the north exit, and gives visitors the option of stopping in downtown to eat or as a break prior to the long drive to the Coast. j) Utilize core area shared parking and parking standards to encourage pedestrian and bicycle access to the Cloverdale Depot and which encourage walking.

February 28, 1995 - Page 39 The Station Area/Downtown Plan Transportation Management Study (Appendix 3) notes that the City of Cloverdale does not have the traffic or parking congestion found in other station areas. It outlines parking techniques that reduce or eliminate required parking, with the anticipation that passenger rail, walking, frequent local transit, and various charges for parking or subsidy from employers will reduce the number of spaces needed. Cloverdale does not have any of those prerequisites, particularly transit with a frequency that would substitute for automobile ownership or large employers that can provide parking cash out and alternate rides. Therefore, the Station Area/Downtown Plan continues to rely on required parking as a basic requirement. Nevertheless, the City’s downtown parking requirements have used shared parking standards to encourage parking once to access multiple destinations, twenty-four hour occupancy of spaces for uses that have different parking peaks, retention of close-in residential, and reduction of the number of parking spaces in the downtown while still meeting parking needs. That program is continued as a part of the Station Area/Downtown Plan, and a modification of that standard is extended to the Transit Oriented Development area, where parking can be shared if there are different time demands for parking spaces. The Station Area/Downtown Plan does recommend a unified Cloverdale Bus service, with operational support from development outside the core and from visitor uses. That service could set the stage for revised parking standards in the future, particularly if the Cloverdale bus service can be made a free service based on operational support. k) Land uses east of the Depot As noted, the Cloverdale Depot is separated from the developed part of the City, and most of the lands adjacent to the Depot are undevelopable for transit oriented use because of existing industrial development, wastewater plant proximity, and floodplains. The TOD zone is extended to a small property across the street from the Depot. The Cloverdale General Plan recommends that the Asti road frontage be calmed and beautified, with bike/pedestrian lanes, street trees, and narrow roadway, so that it will be an attractive bike and pedestrian access way to the Depot. The General Plan also has several alternate pedestrian/bikeways that will link the Depot to the Russian River, encouraging recreational use of the SMART train. The City should continue to monitor this area and be prepared to amend the Station Area/Downtown Plan if some major change occurs, such as discontinuation of the industrial uses and resolution of flood plain issues.

February 28, 1995 - Page 40 BOOK 2 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The following sections identify the purpose of each proposed Station Area/Downtown Plan zoning district, the Zoning map and General Plan changes that would be needed to implement the plan, and the design standards (basics of form based development) that will be applied to each of those districts. The land use provisions are included in appendix 8, which is the proposed zoning ordinance land use chart for commercial districts.

i) Downtown Core (DTC) District (1) Purpose of the DTC District. (a) The purpose of the Downtown Core (DTC) District is to provide for downtown commercial, cultural and office-related uses which recognize and are compatible with the historical, small town nature of the downtown area. Residential uses are allowed if sited on the second story or behind a commercial building. The district is established in order to reinforce the image of the downtown as the "heart" of Cloverdale and as a public gathering place; provide for a broad range of pedestrian- oriented commercial, office, institutional, cultural, and public uses; maximize the efficiency of the City's downtown district by limiting or prohibiting uses that break the continuity of commercial frontage or are incompatible with an attractive pedestrian shopping area; and promote special architecture and streetscape design which strive to achieve the adopted downtown design elements. (2) Zoning and General Plan amendments required to implement the DTC District

Proposed DTC Rezoning Downtown Core Proposed General Plan Marked lots require rezoning from GC to DTC Marked lots require amendments to 2009 General Plan Exhibit 4 Existing and Proposed Downtown Core (DTC) Zoning and General Plan

(3) Downtown Core DTC Zone Design Standards

February 28, 1995 - Page 41  The intent of the DTC District is to encourage retail storefront design at the street level, so that pedestrian oriented retail uses and similar activity generating uses can locate in the DTC zone without the need for a storefront redesign.  The design model for the DTC District is buildings with 2-3 story height, with the first floor designed for pedestrian oriented retail and activity generating uses and upper stories available for residential, office, or commercial use. Upper floors will generally be differentiated from first floor designs.  The first floor pedestrian oriented retail design is required, even if the proposed use is non-retail.  The street and sidewalk design standard for the DTC District is the new Cloverdale Boulevard improvements on Cloverdale Boulevard and the new First Street improvements on First Street.  Building street frontages shall be pedestrian oriented design as defined (building faces flush with back of sidewalk, display windows which allow visibility to the interior of the store, recessed store entrances, provision for entrances at less than 25 feet foot intervals)  Maximum storefront Design Increment (A) = 50 feet. Maximum Articulation Increment (C) = 25 feet. Tenant increment (B) is specified in land use provisions.

 There shall be 3’ of unobstructed view through first floor storefront windows.

* 3’minimum  All entrances shall be inset or recessed so that doors can open without encroaching into the sidewalk right of way.  A structural articulation element (e.g., an intermediate cornice or canopy) is required between the first and second floor. A fabric awning does not satisfy this requirement.

February 28, 1995 - Page 42 Diagram A  A visible building cap is required at the top of each building wall, except where prohibited by fire codes.

Diagram B  Buildings should be designed for pedestrian-oriented retail use at the sidewalk level. First Floor windows shall occupy at least 70% of the first floor street front elevation and shall have a minimum 1.5 foot wall section at the base of each storefront window.

Diagram C  All four sides of a building shall be designed with equivalent architectural elements as the building front, unless the elevations are not visible (e.g., flush with an adjoining building).  A distinctive corner treatment may be used to emphasize the corner of a building in special locations such as gateways and other places of significance. This treatment differentiates the corner of the building primarily through vertical massing and

February 28, 1995 - Page 43 through articulation with elements such as a corner tower, façade projections/recessions, balconies, roof articulation, and changing repetitive façade elements.  In general, windows shall be recessed into the wall plane four inches or more.  Residential balconies shall not face a street frontage or be visible from public streets or walkways.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the DTC District.  Historic design standards apply in the DTC District. (4) Downtown Core Development Standards (a) See Table 18.05.030 A (5) Sign Provisions (a) Downtown Pedestrian Sign Program:

(b) In addition to commercial signs regulations above, any pedestrian oriented business in the DTC zoning district may have the following additional signs subject to approval of a sign permit: (i) One or more projecting signs with a maximum area of 6 square feet and minimum of 25 feet between signs. Projecting signs shall be oriented toward pedestrians, not automobiles, with a minimum clearance of seven feet if above a public walkway. (ii) “A” frame signs are allowed provided the sign’sfaces are designed as sign art, are made of wood, and there is a minimum eight feet clear space for pedestrians on Cloverdale Boulevard and five feet clear space on other streets. Maximum size for “A” frame signs is eight square feet. The intent of “A” frame signs is pedestrian signage, not automobile signage, and approved sign locations will typically be adjacent to buildings and not adjacent to a street. An “A” frame sign is not permissible for a use that does not have conventional signage identifying the business or use. An encroachment permit, including insurance naming the City as co-insured, shall be obtained for “A” frame signs. The encroachment permit shall show the location of the signs or displays and shall be renewed annually.

(6) Parking Provisions

February 28, 1995 - Page 44 DTC District commercial - retail One parking space/300 sq. ft. of gross floor area or 1 and office only space per 450 square feet if the building provides shared parking (see Section xxx) See Section xxx for exclusions, shared parking, and in- lieu fee provisions. DTC, DTS, and TOD Districts, With use permit approval, parking for the residential mixed use provisions for mixed portion of a mixed use project may be reduced to one residential and non-residential space per unit, provided that the square footage for use. each floor of residential use shall not exceed the square footage of first floor commercial use, and the commercial portion of the building provides all required parking.

February 28, 1995 - Page 45 ii) Downtown Support (DTS) District

(1) Purpose of the DTS District. (a) The purpose of the Downtown Support District is to encourage land uses that support the Downtown Core by providing a wide range of uses that provide customers for the pedestrian-oriented retail in the DTC District. Appropriate uses would be offices which provide daytime customers, lodging and residential uses which provide general customer support, and entertainment uses which draw people downtown. (2) Zoning and General Plan amendments required to implement the DTC District

February 28, 1995 - Page 46 Proposed DTS Rezoning Proposed General Plan DTS Designation All lots require rezoning from DTC to DTS All lots require amendment from DTC to DTS

Exhibit 5 Existing and Proposed Downtown Support (DTS) Zoning and General Plan

(3) Downtown Support DTS Zone Design Standards (a) The design model for the DTS Downtown Support District is to allow flexible design, appropriate to a downtown location, and providing for a wide variety of office, entertainment, residential, lodging, and commercial uses. (b) With the exception of the pedestrian-oriented commercial frontages as outlined in section XXXXX (e.g., display windows and frequent entrances), all standards of the DTC (Downtown Core) District will apply to the DTS District. (4) Downtown Support Development Standards (a) see Table XXXXXXX (5) Sign Provisions. Citywide provisions govern. (6) Parking Provisions( see table XXXXX)

February 28, 1995 - Page 47 DTC, DTS, and TOD Districts, mixed use With use permit approval, parking for the provisions for mixed residential and residential portion of a mixed use project may non-residential use. be reduced to one space per unit, provided that the square footage for each floor of residential use shall not exceed the square footage of first floor commercial use, and the commercial portion of the building provides all required parking.

February 28, 1995 - Page 48 iii) TOD Transit Oriented Development District (1) Purpose of the TOD District. (a) The main purpose of the TOD district is to provide high-density residential development to provide riders for the SMART passenger rail station and employees and customers to support the downtown pedestrian oriented retail core. Secondary purpose of the district would be to allow public or office uses with high employment densities, to provide an employment destination for passenger rail and a source of customers to support the downtown pedestrian retail. Associated uses that provide non-retail services to residents are also allowed. (b) All building designs, except public or hospital use, should have a residential design and should face the street, even if the primary use is non-residential. (2) Zoning and General Plan amendments required to implement the TOD District

Proposed TOD Rezoning Proposed General Plan TOD Designation All lots require rezoning from GC and R-2 to TOD All lots require 2009 General Plan amendment to TOD Exhibit 6 Existing and Proposed Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Zoning and General Plan

(3) TOD District Design Standards

February 28, 1995 - Page 49  The design model for the TOD core is buildings with front entrances facing a street and with parking to the rear. The goal is to create a walkable neighborhood to encourage walking between buildings, to the downtown, to public transit, and to the passenger rail station. In general, the buildings will have the appearance of row housing or grand single family houses (but with multiple living or working spaces). The space in the residential appearing buildings may be used for live-work, office, lodging, or limited commercial and small scale public use as well as residential use. Large-scale public uses may use an alternate design, appropriate to public purposes but also complementing the residential design model.  Front access to individual units shall be by a stoop or porch. Access to public buildings shall create a distinctive entrance feature that welcomes the public into the building. Entrances shall not be flat against the building front without a substantial architectural feature to distinguish the entrance.

Stoop Porch Diagram D  Streets should be designed in a grid pattern with short blocks to provide safe walking and bike circulation. Street frontages should have comfortable sidewalks, trees in planter strips or tree grates, and pedestrian-scale street lights.  Buildings should be located close together and should have architectural variety (windows, materials, projections) on the ground floor to create visual interest to pedestrians.  Parking should be to the rear of buildings and not between the public right-of-way and the functional front or side of the building. Private roads that function as through streets are considered as public right-of-way for this purpose.  Access driveways should be shared between buildings or facilities to limit the number of curb cuts that would cross public sidewalks and cause conflicts with pedestrians.  Shared parking between residential and non-residential use is encouraged.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the TOD District. (4) TOD Land Use Standards (a) see Table XXXXXXX

February 28, 1995 - Page 50 (5) Sign Provisions. (see zoning ordinance table XXXX) (6) Parking Provisions (see zoning ordinance table XXXX)

DTC, DTS, and TOD Districts, mixed use With use permit approval, parking for the residential provisions for mixed residential and portion of a mixed use project may be reduced to non-residential use. one space per unit., provided that the square footage for each floor of residential use shall not exceed the square footage of first floor commercial use, and the commercial portion of the building provides all required parking.

iv) Office-Residential District

(1) Location and Purpose of the Office-Residential District. The purpose of the Office/Multi-Family (O-R) District is to provide for a mix of compatible office and residential uses, and to conserve the historic land use and development patterns surrounding the downtown core. The historic patterns are based on older, smaller single family residential buildings with typical single family front yards and parking, with a distinct neighborhood fabric of houses in close walking proximity to the downtown. While the O-R zone allows office uses, the intent is to maintain and conserve a residential neighborhood appearance. To that purpose, a PUD permit can be granted giving the residential character precedence over parking and other site development standards. (2) Zoning and General Plan amendments required to implement the O-R District

February 28, 1995 - Page 51 Proposed O-R Rezoning boundaries Proposed O-R General Plan Revisions Marked lots require change from DTC to O-R Marked lots require change to O-R Designation Zoning “M” (Mixed) designator will bechanged to O-R

Exhibit 7 Existing and Proposed Office Residential (O-R) Zoning and General Plan

(3) O-R Zone Design Standards  The design model for the O-R District is to conserve the existing residential style buildings, including design, size, scale, and neighborhood continuity created by existing (pre-2009) single family housing, while allowing both single family and downtown serving office uses to occupy the structures.  A PUD Permit may be granted with flexible land use, parking, setback, and mixed use standards in order to maintain neighborhood design and character (see PUD Permit standards).  Preservation of existing residential structural types is preferred to demolition and construction of new buildings. If new construction is proposed, design shall be based entirely on conserving the residential neighborhood design character of the area, including form, color, height, materials, window designs, types of front door access, and yard characteristics of surrounding older houses and buildings. The area

February 28, 1995 - Page 52 between the building and the street shall not be used for parking in new construction.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the O-R District.  Future historic design provisions shall apply in the O-R District. (4) Office-Residential Land Use Standards (a) see Table XXXXXX (5) Sign Provisions (see zoning ordinance section XXXXXX) (6) Parking Provisions (see zoning ordinance section XXXX)

February 28, 1995 - Page 53 V.) Neighborhood Boulevard Design Review Area (7) The Neighborhood Boulevard Design Review Area applies to properties fronting Cloverdale Boulevard to the north and south of the downtown. The purpose of the design review standards is to provide an attractive entrance to the downtown from the north and from the south, so that there is continuity of attractive urban design in the Neighborhood Boulevard Design Review Area (8) Zoning and General Plan amendments required to implement the O-R District. The Zoning Ordinance will be revised to include the design standards. No General Plan amendment is necessary to implement the design review area.

North Area South Area

Exhibit 8 Proposed Neighborhood Boulevard Design Review Areas

(9) Neighborhood Boulevard Design Standards  The intent of the Neighborhood Boulevard standards is to provide an attractive and appropriate transition into central Cloverdale.  The design model for Cloverdale Boulevard is a tree-lined street where walking and bicycling is encouraged, and pavement for automobile uses is minimized, consistent with General Plan policies.  On-street parking is not allowed unless separated from travel lanes by a landscaped island or where existing street configuration allows parking.  All land uses shall have front entrances on Cloverdale Boulevard.  Parking between Cloverdale Boulevard and the front of the building is not allowed.  Site designs shall not allow backing onto Cloverdale Boulevard.  Residential, office, lodging uses shall be designed as larger residential buildings (e.g. older houses in the northern Neighborhood Boulevard area).

February 28, 1995 - Page 54  Retail and other commercial uses shall be designed to complement the residential design standard above.  Future historic design provisions apply to this area. BOOK 3 IMPLEMENTATION / REVITALIZATION STRATEGIES 1 Immediate Actions (0-2 year from date of Plan adoption) a) Design a project evaluation system that allows the City to review public and economic benefits of City expenditures and to choose those with the greatest economic and public benefit returns. i) Source of funds would generally be redevelopment funds, housing funds, grants, and long- term developer contributions. ii) Benefits would generally be (1) Return on City investment (usually tax increment or general fund tax revenues) (2) Project costs in substantial excess of City support (e.g. total costs 5, 10, or 20+ times the City investment) (3) Job creation (construction jobs, permanent primary employment, permanent secondary employment) (4) housing (either affordable or needed market rate housing) (5) Design excellence (evaluation of the project and the project in neighborhood and citywide context) (6) Ongoing transit improvements (increase frequency and transit of the City Bus to serve the Cloverdale Station) b) Revise the General Plan and adopt Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map amendments to implement the Downtown Core, Downtown Support, Transit Oriented Development, and Office- Residential Zoning Districts and the Neighborhood Boulevard Design Standards. c) Adopt General Plan policy to require or encourage visitor uses with shuttles that integrate into the City Bus system. d) Adopt the Growth Management Program to implement General Plan and Station Area/Downtown Plan policies that encourage close in growth and to reinforce policies that any large development outside the core provides ongoing support of City Bus service to the Cloverdale Depot. e) Integrate Station Area/Downtown Plan projects into the Redevelopment five-year plan.

f) Refine design concept of the Cloverdale Greenway to identify alignment, costs, and time frame Formatted: Outline numbered + for new construction, including adoption of an alignment for the Citrus Fair Drive/Cloverdale Level: 2 + Numbering Style: a, b, c, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Boulevard intersection and to make changes in the freeway offramps to reduce speed and Aligned at: 0.25" + Tab after: 0.5" protect pedestrians at ramp crossings + Indent at: 0.5", Widow/Orphan control, Adjust space between Latin g) Develop a program and priorities for public/private partnerships to encourage new retail uses, and Asian text, Adjust space between new commercial uses, new job-creating strategies, and targeted housing priorities for Asian text and numbers implementing the Station Area/Downtown Plan. Use the program to support grant applications. Deleted: . Targets for the program would be:

February 28, 1995 - Page 55 i) Housing in the TOD District. ii) Retail or other activity and revenue producing construction or use in the DTC frontage of the Citrus Fair. iii) Encourage pedestrian-oriented retail, activity generating entertainment, small restaurants on the first floor of DTC uses, and residential, office, or lodging uses above the first floor.

iv) Work with brokers and real estate professionals to identify market feasibility related to Formatted: Bullets and Numbering rents, space needs, and type of business that would want to locate in Cloverdale h) Design of economic development programs should include ways to identify and attract niche uses i) Develop a signage program to direct visitor traffic from the central Cloverdale exit (Citrus Fair Drive) to access Highway 128 Mendocino Coast traffic, but without directing through the city all Highway 128 traffic. 2 Short term actions (0-3 years from adoption) a) Encourage projects of opportunity that are consistent with the public/private partnership priorities. b) Prepare south anchor master plan for the TOD District c) Prepare north area concept plan for Civic Center uses. d) Work with CALTRANS to finalize what parts of the undercossing right of way can be used for the Cloverdale Greenway. 3 Medium term actions (3-5 years from adoption) a) Negotiate the pedestrian opening in the sound wall leading from the Cloverdale Depot to Tarman Tract. 4 Long term actions (5-10 years) a) Develop the Cloverdale Greenway b) Continue planning and development efforts associated with the South Anchor of the Downtown area c) Redevelop the north anchor Civic Center area. 5 Support Projects of Opportunity that may occur at any time (ongoing) a) Be available to support new private development in the Downtown if proposed, including processing assistance, incentives, and possible funding if the project has substantial leveraging. b) Fund and improve the City Bus service as described using funding from developments north and south of the City or visitor serving uses.

February 28, 1995 - Page 56 APPENDIX

1 Outline of work plan fulfillment –10 elements of the scope of work 2 Mundie & Associates Economic Study 3 Nelson Nygarrd Parking Analysis 4 FTS Public Workshop Presentations 1, 2, 3. 5 ULI TOD Market Place 2009 Report 6 Public Participation Marketing and Public Outreach Strategy 7 City of Cloverdale Parking Ordinance 8 Development Regulations/Commercial Use Regulations Chart (Chapter 18.05) 9 List of Document Exhibits by Title and Page number

February 28, 1995 - Page 57 Chapter 18.05 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS

Section 18.05.010 Purpose and Intent. The Cloverdale General Plan and Station Area/Downtown Precise Plan outline goals, objectives and policies regarding the character of commercial uses and development. It is the purpose of this chapter to implement these goals, objectives and policies. The commercial districts have two centers –downtown and the Furber Plaza area. For the past 20 years, the City has concentrated on removed strip commercial development that lined Cloverdale Boulevard when it was a state highway, and has focused on strengthening two concentrated commercial areas -- the downtown and the Furber Plaza shopping center area; although, a small amount of strip commercial zoning still remains. The purpose of commercial zoning is to continue the focus on the two core areas. Section 18.05.020 Commercial Land Use Districts A. Intent of Office/Multi-Family (O-R) District The purpose of the Office/Multi-Family (O-R) District is to provide for a mix of compatible office and residential uses, and to conserve the historic land use and development patterns surrounding the downtown core. The historic patterns are based on older, smaller single family residential buildings with typical single family front yards and parking, with a distinct neighborhood fabric of houses in close walking proximity to the downtown. While the O-R zone allows office uses, the intent is to maintain and conserve a residential neighborhood appearance. To that purpose, a PUD permit can be granted giving the residential character precedence over parking and other site development standards. B. Intent of Downtown Core (DTC) District The purpose of the Downtown Core (DTC) District is to provide for downtown commercial, cultural and office-related uses which recognize and are compatible with the historical, small town nature of the downtown area. Residential uses are allowed if sited on the second story or behind of a commercial building. The district is established in order to reinforce the image of the downtown as the "heart" of Cloverdale and as a public gathering place; provide for a broad range of pedestrian-oriented commercial, office, institutional, cultural, and public uses; maximizing the efficiency of the City's downtown district by limiting or prohibiting uses the break the continuity of commercial frontage or are incompatible with an attractive pedestrian shopping area; and promoting special architecture and streetscape design which strive to achieve the adopted downtown design elements. C. Intent of the Downtown Support (DTS) District. The purpose of the Downtown Support District is to encourage land uses that support the Downtown Core by providing a wide range of uses that provide customers for the pedestrian- oriented retail in the DTC District. Appropriate uses would be offices which provide daytime customers, lodging and residential uses which provide general customer support, and entertainment uses which draw people downtown. C. Intent of the Transit Oriented Development TOD District. The main purpose of the TOD district is to provide high-density residential development to provide riders for the SMART passenger rail station and employees and customers to support the downtown pedestrian oriented retail core. Secondary purpose of the district would be to allow public or office uses with high employment densities, to provide an employment destination for

February 28, 1995 - Page 58 passenger rail and a source of customers to support the downtown pedestrian retail. Associated uses that provide non-retail services to residents are also allowed. All building designs, except public or hospital use, should have a residential design and should face the street, even if the primary use is non-residential. C. Intent of General Commercial (G-C) District The primary purpose of the General Commercial (G-C) District is to create, preserve and enhance areas for small scale retail establishments which are conveniently located to provide for frequently recurring needs of outlying residents, which uses are clearly subservient to the downtown and which are appropriate at intersections of major thoroughfares that surround residential neighborhoods. Residential uses are discouraged. The district is also used for the Furber Plaza Shopping Center, which provides retail and commercial services for the south of downtown. The provisions of the G-C District specifically favor retail uses, and office or other non-retail use should not disrupt a pedestrian shopping experience except as smaller storefronts in a row of retail shops or in areas on a site separate from the retail area. E. Intent of Service Commercial (S-C) District The primary purpose of the Service Commercial (S-C) District is to allow more intensive retail, service and heavy commercial uses including warehousing and wholesale commercial uses. Residential uses are not allowed. While the light industrial and heavy commercial uses would normally be expected in industrial areas, the S-C District allows for certain of those uses to be established at in-town locations, where they can serve resident needs, if the external impacts of those uses do not disturb adjoining residential and commercial neighborhoods.

Commercial Use Regulations

Section 18.05.030 Commercial Use Regulations Permitted uses within Commercial Districts in the City of Cloverdale are identified in Table 18.05.030-A. Section 18.05.030 Commercial Use Regulations

Permitted uses within Commercial Districts in the City of Cloverdale are identified in the Table below.

TABLE 18.05.030-A Uses Permitted Within Commercial Districts

P Permitted PP Permitted Subject to Plot Plan Review C Permitted Subject to issuance of a Conditional Use Permit NP Not Permitted - Does not apply in the zoning district

Land Uses Commercial Zoning Districts

February 28, 1995 - Page 59 Office and Related Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Administrative offices –Offices with limited customer access. (see definitions) (See note 1)  With less than 1,500 square feet P P P P P C  1,500 square feet or larger C P C C C C  More than 25 feet of first floor frontage NP - - - - -

General office use (see definitions) (See note 1)  With less than 1,500 square feet P P PP P P P  1,500 square feet or larger C P NP C C C  More than 25 feet of first floor frontage NP ------

Commercial Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Pedestrian Oriented Retail (see note 1)  Less than 2,500 square feet P C NP NP P C  2,500 square feet or larger PP C NP NP P C  More than 50 feet of first floor frontage C - - - - -

General Retail (see note 1)  With less than 1,500 square feet P P NP 1 NP P P 1  1,500 square feet or larger C PP NP NP PP PP  More than 25 feet of first floor frontage NP - - - - -

Household Services. (Repair and service of household goods) see definitions.  With less than 1,500 square P P NP 1 NP P C 1  1,500 square feet or larger C P NP NO C C  More than 25 feet of first floor frontage NP - - - - -

Personal Services –Barber and Beauty Shops, nail salons,  With less than 1,500 square feet P P C P P C  1,500 square feet or larger C P NP C C C  More than 25 feet of first floor frontage NP - - - - -

Catering establishments PP PP NP NP PP P Dry cleaning with on-site cleaning equipment. Self NP PP PP NP C C service laundries. Feed and tack stores NP NP NP NP C PP Parking lot Kiosks (e.g. film, coffee, etc.) NP NP NP NP C NP Liquor stores C C C NP C C Outside sales or display areas for uses allowed in the underlying zoning district. PP PP NP NP C C  Less than 100 square feet - - Animal care including day care and grooming NP NP NP NP NP C Second hand stores C C NP NP C NP Restaurants DTC DTS TOD 0-R G-C SC With entertainment C C NP NP C C

February 28, 1995 - Page 60 Without entertainment C C NP NP Less than 50 seats P P C NP P C 50 seats or more PP C C NP PP C Outdoor seating accessory to a restaurant (including sidewalk seating) Less than 12 outdoor seats P PP NP NP PP C More than 12 outdoor seats PP C NP NP C C Fast food restaurants* With Drive-Thru Window NP NP NP NP C C Without Drive-Thru Window PP NP NP NP PP C Bar/Cocktail lounge C C NP NP C C Wine tasting/sampling and sales PP PP NP NP PP NP Hotels and Lodging DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Bed and Breakfast Inns PP C C C NP C Vacation Rental C C NP NP C NP Hotels and Motels a. Up to 12 rooms C PP PP C C C b. More than 13 rooms C PP C NP C C Recreational vehicle park NP NP NP NP NP C Medical Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Medical Offices C PP C C C C More than 25 feet of first floor frontage - NP - - - - Hospital, including convalescent hospitals. NP C C NP C NP Veterinary offices and animal hospitals  Without exterior kennels, pens, & runs NP C NP PP C C  With exterior kennels, pens, and runs NP NP NP NP NP C Vehicle sales and service DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Automobile and light truck sales and/or service, NP NP NP NP NP C boat and camper sales and /or service, motorcycle sales and/or service, car washes, tire sales & service. Automobile service station * NP C NP NP C C Industrial/Research & Development Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Light manufacturing or processing. NP NP NP NP NP C Recycling facilities, NP NP NP NP C C Wholesale and distribution uses and warehouses. NP NP NP NP NP C Mini storage for public use within an enclosed NP NP NP NP C PP building. Public/Quasi Public Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Public/Quasi Public Uses C C C C C C Theaters, including both motion picture and live PP PP NP NP NP NP performing arts Day nurseries, nursery schools, and child care NP C C C C NP facilities Recreation Uses Athletic and health clubs and indoor commercial C C C NP C C recreation facilities, dance schools. Commercial recreation facilities (outdoor)* NP C C NP C C

February 28, 1995 - Page 61 Residential Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Congregate care, assisted living, and convalescent C C C C NP C homes Multiple family residential uses above a permitted PP PP PP PP C NP commercial or office use Multi Familiy Residential first floor NP C PP C NP NP Single-family house NP NP NP PP NP NP Emergency/Transitional Housing NP NP PP NP NP NP Accessory Uses DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C SC Accessory uses located on the same site as a PP PP PP PP PP PP permitted use Temporary Uses PP PP PP PP PP PP Other uses similar to, and no more objectionable than the uses identified above, as determined by C C C C C C the Planning Commission Outdoor storage on a vacant parcel NP NP NP NP NP NP

1. Commercial projects which serve as a city proposed catalyst projects for the downtown development may be approved with a use permit in the TOD District

February 28, 1995 - Page 62 18.05.040 Commercial Site Development Standards A. General Requirements 1. The below Table sets forth minimum Site Development Standards for Commercial development within Commercial Districts.

COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DTC DTS TOD O-R G-C S-C

Lot area, in square feet None None 6,000 6,000 6,000 Lot width None None 60' 60' 60' Lot depth None None 100' 100' 100' Maximum front building setback 0' 0’ 15’ 20' 15' 20' Minimum front building setback 0’ 0’ 10’ ------Maximum building length - - 120’ - - - Interior side building setback 0' 0’ 10’ 5' 0' 0' Street side building setback 0' 0' 10’ 15' 10' 20' Rear building setback 0' 0' 10’ 15' 10' 10'  Abutting R-1 or R-2 zoning - - 20’ 20’ - - Maximum lot coverage 100% 100% 60% 60% 60% Maximum floor area ratio 3.0 2.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 Maximum building height 40' or 3 35' or 2 40’ or 3 35' or 2 35' or 2 35'or 2 stories stories stories stories stories stories Minimum space between buildings - - 20’ - - - Minimum building height 25’ 25” 2 stories - - - Minimum first floor ceiling height. 12’ 12’ - - - Provision of open space  Public open space per 1,000 s.f. of - - 100 s.f. - - - building - - - - -  Public open space/res. unit - - 150 s.f. - - -  Private open space/res. unit 60 s.f. Notes to Table : Larger setbacks may be required based on special requirements listed in Chapter 18.08, surrounding development, or building code regulations.

Section 18.05.060 PUD Permit Provisions

PUD Permit Provision for the O-R (Office/Multi Family) District A PUD Permit may be granted to modify provisions of O-R (Office/Multi Family) Districts in a manner that conserves the existing built environment and livability for residents as the neighborhoods change from residential to office or mixed use. 1. Parking may be reduced for the conversion of an existing house to office use, as long as the house is not expanded, and the parking is maximized to the extent possible, while also retaining the appearance and feel of a residential property (e.g. parking in the residential driveway, including tandem parking, and/or parking to the rear of the building). Reductions shall not be allowed if parking other than the driveway is provided in the front or street side yard.

February 28, 1995 - Page 63 2. Mixed residential and office use or conversion from single family to multiple family use may be allowed within a pre-existing residential structure without requiring the residential use be above a conforming office use. 3. Underlying District site development standards and parking standards may be reduced or waived for properties that are meet criteria for historic designation in the National or State Registers, or as historic conservation sites based on General Plan criteria. District requirements, may be modified with the following provisions: a. A historic report shall be prepared identifying the design, materials, and site features that generally meet the criteria in National Register Bulletin 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. b. The PUD permit shall include a plan for preservation of the identified historic design, materials, and site features, and the project shall implement the plan. E. PUD Permit Provisions for the DTC(Downtown Commercial Downtown Core) District A PUD Permit may be granted to modify provisions of the DT-C(Downtown Commercial Downtown Core) District to allow residential development that supports downtown business. 1. First floor residential uses may be allowed on properties which do not have frontage other than a driveway on a street and do not have the potential to be used for pedestrian oriented buildings or uses. 2. Residential densities may exceed those allowed in the General Plan for a project providing senior housing. 3. For sites which have pedestrian oriented buildings and mixed residential and commercial use, a portion of the residential development may be placed on the first floor to the rear of the building, as long as the square footage of residential use does not exceed 50% of the commercial use on the first floor, and the residential use is not fronting on the sidewalk.

Section 18.05.070 Commercial District Design Requirements

1. Downtown Core DTC Zone Design Standards  The intent of the DTC District is to encourage retail storefront design at the street level, so that pedestrian oriented retail uses and similar activity generating uses can locate in the DTC zone without the need for a storefront redesign.  The design model for the DTC District is buildings with 2-3 story height, with the first floor designed for pedestrian oriented retail and activity generating uses and upper stories available for residential, office, or commercial use. Upper floors will generally be differentiated from first floor designs.  The first floor pedestrian oriented retail design is required, even if the proposed use is non-retail.

February 28, 1995 - Page 64  The street and sidewalk design standard for the DTC District is the new Cloverdale Boulevard improvements on Cloverdale Boulevard and the new First Street on First Street.  Building street frontages shall be pedestrian oriented design as defined (building faces flush with back of sidewalk, display windows which allow visibility to the interior of the store, recessed store entrances, provision for entrances at less than 25 feet foot intervals,  Maximum storefront Design Increment (A) = 50 feet. Maximum Articulation Increment (C) = 25 feet. Tenant increment (B) is specified in land use provisions.

 There shall be 3’ of unobstructed view through first floor storefront windows.

 All entrances shall be inset or recessed so that doors can open without encroaching into the sidewalk right of way.  A structural articulation element (e.g. an intermediate cornice or canopy) is required between the first and second floor. A fabric awning does not satisfy this requirement.

 A visible building cap is required at the top of each building wall, except where prohibited by fire codes.

February 28, 1995 - Page 65  Buildings should be designed for pedestrian-oriented retail use at the sidewalk level. First Floor windows shall occupy at least 70% of the first floor street front elevation and shall have a minimum 1.5 foot wall section at the base of each storefront window.

 All four sides of a building shall be designed with equivalent architectural elements as the building front, unless the elevations are not visible (e.g. flush with an adjoining building).  A distinctive corner treatment may be used to emphasize the corner of a building in special locations such as gateways and other places of significance. This treatment differentiates the corner of the building primarily through vertical massing and through articulation with elements such as a corner tower, façade projections/recessions, balconies, roof articulation, and changing repetitive façade elements.  In general, windows shall be recessed into the wall plane four inches or more.  Residential balconies shall not face a street frontage or be visible from public streets or walkways.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the DTC District.  Historic design standards apply in the DTC District.

2. DTS (Downtown Support) Design Standards  The design model for the DT Support district is to allow flexible design, appropriate to a downtown location, and providing for a wide variety of office, entertainment, residential, lodging, and commercial uses.

February 28, 1995 - Page 66  With the exception of the pedestrian-oriented commercial frontages (e.g. display windows and frequent entrances), all standards of the DTC (Downtown Core) District will apply to the DTS District.

3. TOD Core Design Standards  The design model for the TOD core is buildings with front entrances facing a street and with parking to the rear. The goal is to create a walkable neighborhood to encourage walking between buildings, to the downtown, to public transit, and to the passenger rail station. In general, the buildings will have the appearance of row housing or grand single family houses (but with multiple living or working spaces). The space in the residential appearing buildings may be used for live-work, office, lodging, or limited commercial, and small scale public use as well as residential use. Large-scale public uses may use an alternate design, appropriate to public purposes but also complements the residential design model.  Front access to individual units shall by a stoop or porch. Access to public buildings shall create a distinctive entrance feature that welcomes the public into the building. Entrances shall not be flat against the building front without a substantial architectural feature to distinguish the entrance.

Stoop Porch  Streets should be designed in a grid pattern with short blocks to provide safe walking and bike circulation. Street frontages should have comfortable sidewalks, trees in planter strips or tree grates, and pedestrian-scale street lights.  Buildings should be located close together and should have architectural variety (windows, materials, projections) on the ground floor to create visual interest to pedestrians.  Parking should be to the rear of buildings and not between the public right-of-way and the functional front or side of the building. Private roads that function as through streets are considered as public right-of-way for this purpose.  Access driveways should be shared between buildings or facilities to limit the number of curb cuts that would cross public sidewalks and cause conflicts with pedestrians.  Shared parking between residential and non-residential use is encouraged.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the TOD District. Street sketches Photographs of representative buildings.

4. Office-Residential design standards.

February 28, 1995 - Page 67  The O-R District provides a transition between the older residential areas surrounding the downtown and the pedestrian-oriented downtown businesses. The design model for the O-R District is to conserve the older residential structures or build new structures using the existing houses as a model, even if the use is no longer residential. Flexibility in zoning standards  The design model for the O-R District is to conserve the existing residential style buildings, including design, size, scale, and neighborhood continuity created by existing (pre-2009) single family housing, while allowing both single family and downtown serving office uses to occupy the structures.  A PUD Permit may be granted with flexible land use, parking, setback, and mixed use standards in order to maintain neighborhood design and character (see PUD Permit standards).  Preservation of existing residential structural types is preferred to demolition and construction of new buildings. If new construction is proposed, design shall be based entirely on conserving of the residential neighborhood design character of the area, including form, color, height, materials, window designs, type of front door access, and yard characteristics of surrounding older houses and buildings. The area between the building and the street shall not be used for parking in new construction.  Chain link fencing is not allowed in the O-R District.  Historic design provisions shall apply in the O-R District.

5. See Section 18. 06 for design standards along Cloverdale Boulevard

6. Commercial Land Use Standards The following standards shall apply to development in all commercial districts, except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance: a. All indoor uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed structure unless outdoor use is allowed in the land use table.18-05-030A. b. There shall be no visible storage of motor vehicles (except display areas for sale or rent of motor vehicles), trailers, airplanes, boats, recreational vehicles, or their composite parts; loose rubbish, garbage, junk, or their receptacles; tents, equipment; or building materials in any portion of a lot. No storage shall occur on any vacant parcel. Building materials for use on the same premises may be stored on the parcel during the time that a valid building permit is in effect for construction. c. All roof-mounted air conditioning or heating equipment, vents or ducts shall not be visible for any abutting lot, or any public street or right-of-way. This shall be accomplished through the extension of the main structure or roof or screened in a manner which is architecturally integrated with the main structure(s). d. Every parcel with a structure shall have a trash receptacle on the premises. The receptacle(s) shall be screened from public view on at least three sides by a solid wall or fence and on the fourth side by a solid gate.

February 28, 1995 - Page 68 e. Elevations of all structures shall be architecturally treated to ensure compatibility with high quality neighboring structures. f. The creation of new lots within commercial districts following the date of the adoption of this Title shall conform to the minimum dimensions, except in the case of condominium lots or individual lots within a shopping center, in which case no minimums are established except at the boundary of the shopping center or commercial development. Parcels created within shopping centers are exempt from the site development standards stated herein, as they relate to minimum site areas, and minimum lot width and depth, as long as the following conditions are met: 1. A conceptual development plan for the entire center has been developed and approved pursuant to this Title; 2. Appropriate easements for reciprocal access, parking and maintenance are recorded; and 3. All applicable setbacks adjacent to the exterior boundaries of the shopping center or commercial development are met.

February 28, 1995 - Page 69 Agenda Item 2 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ONMEIGOF THE COMMUNITYJOINTMEETING DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CLOVERDALE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY

January 13, 2010 CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC BUSINESS SESSION: 6:30 p.m. CLOVERDALE SENIOR CENTER, 311 N MAIN STREET, CLOVERDALE, CA 95425

–5:30 p.m. CLOSEDSESSION

OPENING: Call to Order –Mayor Russell called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Roll Call Present - Council Members Wolter, Brigham, Palla, Vice Mayor Raymond and Mayor Russell Agenda Review - Closed Session (Changes and/or Deletions): There were no changes made to the agenda.

: ON CLOSED SESSIONPUBLICCOMMENTS AGENDA

a o Rselopened and closedMayorRussell the public comment period. No testimony was received.

LOSED SESSION: C RECESSTO

The City Council conducted a closed session pursuant to WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIORS:CONFERENCE a ionaGovernment Code sectionCalifornia 54957.6; Agency designated representative: Nina Regor. . Organization: CloverdaleEmployee Classified Association Motion was made by Councilmember Palla, seconded by Councilmember Wolter, moving to Action: p rv the supplemental MOU betweenapprove the Classified Service Employees Association and the City te carried by unanimous vote of the City Managerand to execute authorizing the agreement. The vo (5-ayes, 0-noes). all Councilmembers

: The City Council conducted a closed session pursuant to WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIORSCONFERENCE a ionaGovernment Code sectionCalifornia 54957.6; Agency designated representative: Nina Regor. Cloverdale Dispatchers’ Association Organization: ployee

The City Council conducted a closed session WITH REAL PROPERTYCONFERENCE NEGOTIATORS: -300-006 PTN to to Government Code sectionpursuant 54956.8 regarding real property APN 001 ns. Agency Negotiators: Nina Regor; Karen Shimizu; Negotiating Party: Erickson discussnegotiatio

The City Council conducted a closed session WITH REAL PROPERTYCONFERENCE NEGOTIATORS: Fair Drive to Government Code sectionpursuant 54956.8 regarding real property located at 1 Citrus o dsusnegotiations. Agency Negotiators:to discuss Nina Regor; Bruce Kibby; Karen Shimizu. Negotiating a t:lvraeCitrus Fair Party:Cloverdale

PUBLIC BUSINESS SESSION –6:30 p.m. CONVENE

OPENING: Call to Order –Mayor Russell called the public business session to order at 6:30 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance Report Out of Closed Session –Attorney Danly’s report out of closed session: reported on one item in accordance with Section 54957.1 of the Brown Act, Danly Attorney including labor negotiations with represented employees approval of an agreementconcerning City Manager Regor summarized the changes to the to Section 54957.6 of thepursuant Brown Act. O wt the Cloverdale ClassifiedMOUwith Employee Association. Conflict of Interest Declaration –No conflicts were declared. Agenda Review, Regular Session (Changes and/or Deletions) –Manager Regor pulled Consent had to be made to the schedule. changes Item #3because

: PUBLICCOMMENTS

a o Rselopened the public commentMayorRussell period.

advised Council that a city re-construction project involving the sidewalk in FrancisDomenichelli, left exposed aggregate and the new color does not match the old. She stated her home front ofher the item be agendized for resolution. The item was on the matter anddissatisfaction requested that ublic Works Subcommittee for consideration. to the P referred

, stated her frustration with the overall presentation of some dilapidated Cloverdale Chris Andersen, properties owned by out of town property owners. She feels that it is time that landlords downtown stop negatively impacting the downtown. In response, City Manager in the community with nostake owners within the that Carla HowellRegorexplained has sent out a letter to various property requesting meetings. The Redevelopment Plan Update will include the downtown core downtown . assist in providing optionsarea andwill to the city in dealing with these properties

a o Rselclosed the commentMayorRussell period.

: / PRESENTATIONSPROCLAMATIONS

A Proclamation of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale presented to Cotati Police Chief Bob Stewart upon his retirement.

read the proclamation that Councilmember Palla offered to personally present to Chief MayorRussell at his retirement party. behalf of the Council Stewarton

CIL REPORTS: (VERBAL REPORT) COUN Wolter reported on various meetings and/or events that he had attended since the Councilmember at rglrcouncil meeting, and reportedlast regular on items discussed at those meetings: Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 2 of 7 North Coast Railroad Authority, January 13, 2010.

Palla reported on various meetings and/or events that he had attended since the last Councilmember eu acuclmeeting, and reportedregularcouncil on items discussed at those meetings: Historical Society Holiday Ceremony, December 16, 2009. Along with Mayor Russell and City Manager Regor, he had met with the Northern Sonoma County Hospital District Staff and Board Chairman and toured Healdsburg Hospital. He stated his appreciation to Cloverdale Police and Fire for distributing toys to children in need on Christmas Eve.

Brigham reported on various meetings and/or events that she had attended since Councilmember h ateua council meeting, andthe reported lastregular on items discussed at those meetings: Budget meetings of the Cloverdale Performing Arts Center Board.

ussell reported on various meetings and/or events that she had attended since the last MayorR eu acuclmeeting, and reportedregularcouncil on items discussed at those meetings: She had been meeting with local business and community leaders, getting their input on a number of issues including micro business enterprises and development of cooperatives. She had met with a representative of Ray’s to discuss their service to the community, the community’s needs and Ray’s needs. Met with Green Belt Alliance representatives January 6, 2010 to discuss the Asti exception area and UGB. Sonoma County Transit Association Board Meeting. SMART Operations Committee meeting.

: CALENDAR CONSENT

Approval of Minutes (2 Sets) –Special Meeting of December 7, 2009 and Regular Meeting of December 9, 2009 (CC) Garibaldi

Resolution No. 001-2010, Revising Enabling Legislation for Council Subcommittees, and Repealing City Council Resolution No. 045-2009 (CC) Regor Recommendation: Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 001-2010, revising enabling legislation for Council Subcommittees, and repealing Resolution No. 045-2009.

Resolution No. 003-2010 Accepting the Citywide Bicycle Lane Striping Project Improvements (CC) Wade Recommendation: Adopt a resolution accepting the Citywide Bicycle Lane Striping Project improvements and authorizing the City Engineer to release the associated bonds.

Resolution No. 004-2010 Accepting the Rehabilitation of Various Streets ARRA Project Improvements (CC) Wade Recommendation: Adopt a resolution accepting the Rehabilitation of Various Streets ARRA Project improvements and authorizing the City Engineer to release the associated bonds.

Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 3 of 7 Resolution No. 005-2010 Accepting the Vintage Meadows Park Restrooms Improvements and Amending the Project Budget (CC) Wade Recommendation: Adopt a resolution accepting the public improvements constructed with the Vintage Meadows Park Restrooms Project, amending the project budget and authorizing the City Engineer to release the associated bonds.

Resolution No. 006-2010 Accepting the 2008-2009 ADA Sidewalk Improvement Project (CC) Wade Recommendation: Adopt a resolution accepting the 2008-2009 ADA Sidewalk Improvement Project and authorizing the City Engineer to release the associated bonds.

Resolution No. 007-2010 Approving a Professional Services Agreement with Z & H Engineering, Inc. for the Runway rehabilitation and taxiway improvements, engineering and construction oversight (CC) Tuma Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement with Z & H Engineering, Inc. for runway rehabilitation and taxiway improvements, engineering and construction oversight.

Resolution No. 002-2010, Supporting Involvement in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and Authorizing the Town of Windsor to Submit an Application on Behalf of the City of Cloverdale (CC) Herpst Recommendation: Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 002-2010, authorizing the Town of Windsor to submit an application for EECBG funds on behalf of the City of Cloverdale.

Motion was made by Councilmember Wolter, seconded by Councilmember Palla, to approve the n: 2, 4-9 as submitted. The motion carried unanimously by voice vote: 5-ayes, 0-noes. Items ConsentCalendar

Councilmembers Wolter, Palla, Brigham, Vice Mayor Raymond and Mayor vote; Ayes in favor:By rollcall Russell.

The minutes of December 7, 2009 and December 9, 2009 were approved 2 Resolution No. 003-2010 was adopted Item 4 Resolution No. 004-2010 was adopted Item 5 Resolution No. 005-2010 was adopted Item 6 Resolution No. 006-2010 was adopted Item 7 Resolution No. 007-2010 was adopted Item 8 Resolution No. 002-2010 was adopted Item 9

: COMMUNICATIONS

Sonoma County Request for Council Member and Alternate on Landfill Task Force.

discussion Councilmember Palla agreed to attend the first meeting (without After abrief ment) and will bring back information to the Council as to the anticipated time commitment commit n etn schedule. and meeting

None UBLICHEARINGS:

Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 4 of 7 NEW BUSINESS:

Appointment of Planning Commission Member and Planning Commission Alternate (CC) Regor Recommendation: By motion order, move to approve Melanie Bagby as a Planning Commission Member, with a term to expire June 30, 2011; and Jeff Boland as a Planning Commission Alternate, with a term to expire June 30, 2011.

iy MngrRegor presented theCity staff Manager report.

Motion was made by Councilmember Palla, seconded by Councilmember Wolter, moving to Action: Melanie Bagby as a Planning Commission Member, with a term to expire June 30, 2011; and int The motion as a Planning CommissionJeff Boland Alternate, with a term to expire June 30, 2011. unanimous voice vote 5-ayes, 0-noes. Ayes in Favor: Councilmembers Palla, Wolter, carriedby Vice Mayor Raymond, and Mayor Russell. Brigham,

h oni proceeded with agendaThe item Council #13 prior considering item #12.

Resolution Adopting the Hearing Procedures Set Forth in Cloverdale Municipal Code Section 1.14.090(B) as the Administrative Hearing Procedures for Purposes of California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31621 and Designating the Cloverdale City Council as the Hearing Body to Hear and Dispose of Petitions Filed Thereunder (CC) Thorington/Danly Recommendation: Move to approve by title only the resolution adopting the hearing procedures set forth in CMC Section 1.14.090(B) as the Administrative Hearing Procedures for purposes of CA Food and Agricultural Code Section 31621, and designating the Cloverdale City Council as the Hearing Body.

to nyDanly presented the staffAttorney report.

-term mechanism in place in the form of an ordinance Palla stated that puttinguncilmember a long spe erd and requested to knowis preferred, what the cost would be to create it. Staff will consider the cost n eunoptions to Council in theand future. return

Motion was made by Councilmember Palla, seconded by Councilmember Wolter, moving to Action: Resolution No. 009-2010, by title only. The motion carried by roll call vote 5-ayes, 0-noes. approve s Palla, Wolter, Brigham, Vice Mayor Raymond and Mayor Russell; Councilmember Ayes inFavor: gis:None. against:

Adopted: City of Cloverdale City Council - 2010 No. 009 Resolution

EO UINOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE RESOLUTION 90(B) AS THE THE HEARING PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN CLOVERDALEADOPTING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 1.14.0 DI ITAIEHEARING PROCEDURES FOR PURPOSES OF CALIFORNIAADMINISTRATIVE FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE SECTION 31621 N EINTN THE CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL AS THE HEARINGAND BODY DESIGNATING TO HEAR AND DISPOSE OF PETITIONS FILED THEREUNDER Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 5 of 7 Consideration of Joint Resolution No. 008-2010/CD001-2010 approving the City and Agency budget for fiscal year 2009-10 (CC/CDA) Regor Recommendation: Move to approve by title only Joint Resolution No. 008-2010/CD001-2010 approving the revised budget for FY 2009-10.

egor presented the staff report. R City Manager

stated his concern about the potential loss of more job positions next fiscal year Palla Councilmember July Budget now. He anticipates that the State will that discussions shouldsuggested start on the n new costs to the City. Vice Mayor Raymond gave assurance that the Council is o beginpassing stay on top of the budget issues. to dedicated

a o Rselallowed public comment.MayorRussell No testimony was received.

Motion was made by Councilmember Palla, seconded by Vice-Mayor Raymond, moving to Action: Joint Resolution No. 008-2010/CD 001-2010, by title only. The motion carried by roll call approve -ayes, 0-noes. Ayes in Favor: Councilmember Palla, Vice Mayor Raymond, Councilmembers vote 5 Wolter, and Mayor Russell; Noes against: None. Brigham,

Adopted: CITY OFCLOVERDALE IY CUCLAND CLOVERDALE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCYCITY COUNCIL -2010 & CD001-2010 NO. 008 RESOLUTION ON EOUINOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALEJOINT AND RESOLUTION THE AGENCY MEMBERS OF THE CLOVERDALE -2010 DEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE REVISED BUDGETUNITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

None ACTION ITEMS: SUBCOMMITTEE

(VERBAL REPORT) REPORTS: SUBCOMMITTEE

Airport - There has not been a meeting since the last report. Finance - There has not been a meeting since the last report. General Administration - There has not been a meeting since the last report. Planning/CDA - There has not been a meeting since the last report. Police - Councilmember Brigham reported on items discussed, as agendized, at the January 4, Chief Tuma noted his appreciation to retiring Cotati Police Chief Subcommittee meeting. Police o etrn him when he first camefor mentoring to Cloverdale. Public Works - There has not been a meeting since the last report. City/Fire District - Councilmember Wolter reported on items discussed, as agendized, at the City/Fire District Subcommittee Meeting. 2010 January11, City/School District –There has not been a subcommittee meeting since the last report; Councilmember Palla did report on a meeting that he had attended with School District however, tf n the Santa Rosa Junior CollegeStaff and Staff regarding the possibility of bringing an early college rg at the High School. programto

: ATTORNEYCITY REPORT MANAGER/CITY

Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 6 of 7 anager Regor’s Report: City M The City Council and the Fire District has reached a tentative conceptual agreement on the  Operation Tax transfer, and the City is close to finalizing the resolutions for the Council and Fire District Board. The Fire Station will be opening soon and she stated appreciation to City Engineer, Paul Wade,  for his work on the project. The Economic Consultant’s Update is available and will be distributed to Council.  The Vintage Meadows Park bathrooms will be opening January 14, 2010. The port-o-lets will  be removed. A cotton wood tree was recently removed along the river park trail. Public Works employee  Dillon Mills converted the stump into a seat for trail users. She noted an amended agenda format, and encouraged Council to provide comments.  The next Lighting & Landscaping District Master Plan meeting, has been scheduled with the  Ioli Ranch and Brookside Terrace areas.

: DIRECTION ON FUTURECOUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Palla would like to discuss various areas around the City with fading “Stop”  signs within the streets. Example: Del Webb Drive and Foothill Blvd. Councilmember Palla would like to discuss an area of the street on Treadway Drive, at  Hatteras Way, that is being dirtied by mud from truck tires.

Mayor Russell adjourned the City Council at 8:10 p.m. to the next scheduled ADJOURNMENT: e t no the City Council, Cloverdalemeetingof Community Development Agency and Cloverdale January 27, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. at the Cloverdale Senior Center, Authority scheduledImprovement lv rae CA 95425. Cloverdale,

Minutes 1/13/2010 Page 7 of 7 City Council Agenda Item: 4 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Consent Nina D. Regor, City Manager Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 001-2010, Revising Enabling Legislation for Council Subcommittees, and Repealing City Council Resolution No. 045-2009 Summary The purpose of this agenda item is to simplify the process for updating the Subcommittee memberships and meeting days/times. In June 2006, the City Council created the Management by Objectives (MBO) system, including City Council Subcommittees, whose purpose it is to aid in the oversight of the system. In October 2008, Council adopted Resolution No. 107-2008 confirming the responsibilities and procedures of the Subcommittees (enabling legislation), and appointing its members. The City of Cloverdale has six Council Subcommittees. Each year, the Council reviews its representation on the Subcommittees. Following that decision, a new Resolution was created, updating the enabling legislation. It was done this way because the membership appointments were embedded in the body of the enabling legislation. This adoption process has become unwieldy, because the updates have not included any changes to the enabling legislation outside of the Subcommittee membership and typical meetings dates/times. As a result, Resolution No. 001-2010 proposes a change in structure: The Subcommittee memberships and typical meeting days times have been removed from the enabling legislation, and will be adopted via separate resolution. This change is reflected in Section 2d. In addition to simplifying the Subcommittee enabling legislation, this allows the Subcommittee memberships to be kept with the other Regional board memberships for ease of reference. No other changes have been made to the Subcommittee enabling legislation. Options N/A Budget/Financial Impact N/A Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 001-2010, revising enabling legislation for Council Subcommittees, and repealing Resolution No. 045-2009 Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 001-2010 cc:

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451 Pg 1 (Rev. 01/09) CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 001-2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE REVISING ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR THE COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES AND REPEALING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 045-2009

WHEREAS, the City Council created the Management by Objectives (MBO) system for setting the City’s business objectives on June 28, 2006; and WHEREAS, the MBO system includes City Council Subcommittees (“Subcommittees”) whose purpose it is to aid in the oversight of the system; and WHEREAS, on October 8, 2008 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 107-2008 confirming the responsibilities and procedures of the Subcommittees, and appointing its members; and WHEREAS, on January 14, 2009 the City Council appointed new members to the Council Subcommittees; and WHEREAS, on January 28, 2009 the City Council approved Resolution No. 003-2009 revising the enabling legislation for the Council Subcommittees; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2009 the City Council approved Resolution No. 045-2009 revising the typical meeting times of some of the Council Subcommittees; and WHEREAS, Subcommittee appointments and regular meeting times have changed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Subcommittee Purpose. Cloverdale Municipal Code (CMC) 2.06 established the City Council Subcommittee system. The purpose of each subcommittee is to assist the City Council in carrying out its oversight and improvement responsibilities to meet the changing needs of the community. This is done by overseeing the applicable budget and business objectives; discussing potential policy recommendations; and reviewing and proposing improvements to pertinent City Code and other regulations. There are currently six subcommittees: a. Airport. The airport subcommittee coordinates with representatives of the Cloverdale Municipal Airport lessees to discuss and resolve issues pertaining to the airport’s financial viability, safety, and effectiveness. b. Finance. The finance subcommittee guides the City’s fiscal well-being by monitoring the City’s annual revenues and expenditures as well as the multi- year fund forecasts; and reviewing and recommending policies concerning areas such as revenues, debt, budget, reserves, and other issues of fiscal stewardship. c. General Administration. The general administration subcommittee discusses issues that are interdepartmental or citywide in nature. It also addresses processes intended to improve Council effectiveness. Topics include but are not limited to personnel, general communications, public affairs, and Council relations. d. Planning/CDA. The planning/CDA subcommittee discusses issues concerning land use, zoning, and the long-term growth and economic development of the

2 community. It also oversees areas pertaining to the Cloverdale Community Development Agency. e. Police. The police subcommittee discusses issues concerning law enforcement and public safety. f. Public Works. The public works subcommittee discusses issues related to the City’s public infrastructure, including the water and wastewater systems, parks, streets, and storm drainage. The subcommittee also addresses topics concerning City Hall and other structures, as well as the local transit system. 2. Subcommittee Membership. a. Expectation of Members. Members are expected to fulfill the following responsibilities: i. Regularly attend the meetings and notify staff in advance if they are not able to attend. ii. Read any background material provided in advance, and fully participate in the discussion on each of the agenda items. iii. Council members are expected to serve on at least one Subcommittee. b. Member Appointment. Council members serve a one year term on the Subcommittee, or until their successor is appointed. However, Council members are encouraged to serve for at least two years on a Subcommittee in order to become fully conversant with its policy issues. i. Annual process. The Council typically reviews and makes new Subcommittee appointments at its first regular meeting in January. This process is described in Attachment A. Attachment A is intended for facilitative purposes. It is not intended to be binding. ii. Temporary appointments. From time to time, a Council member may be unable to meet his/her Subcommittee obligations for a limited period. In such cases, the City Council will evaluate the situation and determine if another Council member should be appointed temporarily to the Subcommittee(s). These appointments occur on an as-needed basis. iii. Mid-year appointments. If a Council member is unable to meet his/her Subcommittee obligations for an extended or undeterminable period of time, the City Council may choose to redistribute Subcommittee appointments among the remaining available Council members. This occurs on an as-needed basis. c. Chair Designation. The Chair is designated during the Subcommittee appointment annual process. When the same two members continue to serve on a Subcommittee, they are encouraged to alternate the Chair designation each year. d. Current Subcommittee Membership and Meeting Times. The subcommittee membership and typical meeting dates and times are periodically revised. Once revised, they are adopted via separate resolution. Meeting dates/times are subject to change. Subcommittees may choose not to hold a meeting, or may choose to hold additional meetings. 3. Subcommittee Meeting Process. a. Meeting agenda. In compliance with requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act, The staff liaison or the City Manager will work with the Subcommittee Chair to set the meeting agenda. The agenda will be finalized and sent to the

3 Subcommittee members at least 72 hours in advance, along with any background materials. Attachment B describes the Subcommittee support process. Attachment B is intended for facilitative purposes. It is not intended to be binding. b. Meeting Minutes. The staff liaison or other staff designated by the City Manager will produce minutes of each meeting. Attachment B describes the Subcommittee support process. Attachment B is intended for facilitative purposes. It is not intended to be binding. 4. Subcommittee Ad Hoc Working Groups. From time to time, the Subcommittee may decide to form an ad hoc working group to accomplish specific short-term tasks assigned to the Subcommittee by the full City Council. Such working groups may include City staff with the pre-approval of the City Manager. One example of an ad hoc working group is the fall harvest dinner planning group. Such working groups are not considered standing committees for the purposes of the Ralph M. Brown Act. 5. Subcommittee Review. From time to time, the City Council may evaluate the effectiveness of the Subcommittee structure or of individual Subcommittees. The City Council may do this on an annual or an as-needed basis. Attachment A describes the process for regular Subcommittee review. Attachment A is intended for facilitative purposes. It is not attended to be binding.

6. Resolution No. 045-2009 is hereby repealed.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No. 001-2010 was duly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale at its regular meeting held on the 10th day of February 2010 by the following roll call vote: (XX-ayes, XX-noes)

AYES IN FAVOR: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:

Approved: Attested:

______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

4 Attachment A: Process for Annual Subcommittee Review and Membership Appointment

It is advisable to regularly review the Subcommittee structure to ensure that the structure and each Subcommittee are functioning effectively. Following is a suggested process for reviewing Subcommittees and appointing members.

1. Before the end of the calendar year, the City Council will discuss the effectiveness of each Subcommittee. Topics may include but are not limited to frequency of meetings, types of issues covered, and if the purpose of a Subcommittee has evolved during the year.

2. Following the meeting, each Council member will rank in order of preference the Subcommittees he/she wants to serve on (1-6 if there are six subcommittees). He/she will also note how many Subcommittees he’s/she’s willing to serve on. Each Council member will separately provide this information to the City Manager, who will compile it and provide it to the Council at a later date.

3. Incoming Council members are provided with the Subcommittee ordinance and implementing resolution. They will complete a prioritization sheet and submit it to the City Manager.

4. At the first Council meeting in January, the City Manager will present the results. Council will deliberate on the appointments.

5. Council will decide on the Chair for each Subcommittee. At its first meeting, each Subcommittee will decide if it wishes to change its typical meeting day/time.

6. Once each Subcommittee’s typical meeting day/time has been either affirmed or revised, staff will bring an updated implementing resolution forward to Council for consideration.

5 Attachment B: Process for Subcommittee Meeting Support –Agendas and Minutes

Following is a suggested process for drafting and finalizing Subcommittee meeting agendas and minutes. “Staff” is used generically to refer to the City Manager, the staff liaison, or designee.

1. Staff will strive to distribute the agenda and any background material by the Friday before the Subcommittee meeting.

2. Staff will draft the meeting agenda in advance and review it with the Subcommittee Chair. Once the agenda is finalized, staff will prepare the background materials.

3. Staff will appropriately post the agenda at least 72 hours in advance, or as required by state law. Staff will provide a copy of the agenda in the next available Council meeting agenda packet.

4. Staff is responsible for taking minutes at the meetings.

5. Staff will provide draft minutes to the Subcommittee as soon as practical so they can be used to report out at an upcoming Council meeting. If the Subcommittee meeting occurs less than a week before the next available Council meeting, the draft minutes may not be provided until the following Council meeting.

6. The Subcommittee will review and approve the minutes at its next meeting. Following approval, staff will provide the finalized minutes in the next available Council meeting agenda packet.

6 City Council Agenda Item: 5 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Consent Nina D. Regor, City Manager Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 011-2010, Adopting the Memberships and Typical Meeting Days/Times for Council Subcommittees and Joint Committees, and Appointing the City of Cloverdale Representatives on Regional Boards. Summary The City of Cloverdale has six Council Subcommittees and two Joint Committees (one with the Cloverdale Fire Protection District and one with the Cloverdale Unified School District). In addition, the City Council has official representatives on a number of regional Committees and Boards. Each year, the Council reviews its representation on these various bodies. At the November 18, 2009 and December 9, 2009 meetings, the City Council discussed the 2010 Council Subcommittee, Joint Committee, and Regional Board/Committee appointment proposal. There was consensus to approve the proposal, with some modifications of Chair appointments for a couple of the Subcommittees. Resolution No. 011-2010 is the final step in the process. It adopts the new roster for membership and meeting days/times for Council subcommittees and joint committees, as well as appoints Cloverdale representatives on regional committees and boards. Options N/A Budget/Financial Impact N/A Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action Move to approve by title only, Resolution No. 011-2010, adopting the memberships and typical meeting days/times for Council Subcommittees and Joint Committees, and appointing the City of Cloverdale representatives on Regional Boards Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 011-2010 cc:

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451 Pg 1 (Rev. 01/09) CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 011-2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE ADOPTING THE MEMBERSHIPS AND TYPICAL MEETING DAYS/TIMES FOR COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES AND JOINT COMMITTEES, AND APPOINTING THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE REPRESENTATIVES ON REGIONAL BOARDS

WHEREAS, the City Council created the Management by Objectives (MBO) system for setting the City’s business objectives on June 28, 2006, including City Council Subcommittees; and WHEREAS, the City establishes typical meeting days/times for Council Subcommittees; and WHEREAS, the City participates on two joint committees with two separate local agencies (the Cloverdale Fire Protection District and the Cloverdale Unified School District); and WHEREAS, the City participates on various regional committees and boards; and WHEREAS, the City appoints official representatives to each of these entities; and WHEREAS, such representation periodically changes; and WHEREAS, Subcommittee, joint committee and regional committee or board appointments and/or regular meeting times have changed.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the 2010 roster of Council Subcommittee, Joint Committee and Regional Board/Committee memberships and typical meeting times is incorporated as Attachment A.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No. 011-2010 was duly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale at its regular meeting held on the 10th day of February 2010 by the following roll call vote: (XX-ayes, XX-noes)

AYES IN FAVOR: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:

Approved: Attested:

______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

Pg 2 Attachment A to Resolution No. 011‐2010

2010 Council Subcommittee, Joint Committee, and Regional Board/Committee Appointments

Council Subcommittees and Joint Committees:

Subcommittee Members Typical Meeting Time

Airport Vice Mayor Jessalee Raymond, Chair 1st Tuesday, 8:00 a.m. Mayor Carol Russell Finance Councilmember Gus Wolter, Chair 4th Thursday, 4:30 p.m. Councilmember Joe Palla General Administration Councilmember Joe Palla, Chair 4th Tuesday, 8:30 a.m. Mayor Carol Russell Planning/CDA Councilmember Mary Ann Brigham, Chair 3rd Wednesday, 5:00 p.m. Councilmember Gus Wolter Police Councilmember Mary Ann Brigham, Chair 1st Monday, 5:00 p.m. Councilmember Gus Wolter Public Works Councilmember Joe Palla, Chair 4th Tuesday, 10:30 a.m. Mayor Carol Russell Joint City/Cloverdale Fire District Councilmember Gus Wolter, Chair 2nd Monday, 5:00 p.m. (monthly until March 31; Vice Mayor Jessalee Raymond quarterly effective April 1, 2010) Joint City/Cloverdale Unified School District Councilmember Joe Palla, Chair 3rd Monday, 5:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Jessalee Raymond

(2/10/10) Page 1 of 2

City of Cloverdale 2010 Council Subcommittee, Joint Committee, and Regional Board/Committee Appointments, continued

Regional Boards and Committees:

Agency Board/Committee Members Typical Meeting Time

Association of Bay Area Govt’s (ABAG) City Manager Nina Regor 3rd Thursday, 7:00 p.m. (Oakland) Climate Protection Campaign Mayor Carol Russell Cloverdale Library Advisory Board Vice Mayor Jessalee Raymond quarterly Cloverdale Rancheria Tribal Council Liaison Councilmember Mary Ann Brigham As needed North Coast Rail Authority Board* Councilmember Gus Wolter Planning Commission Liaison Councilmember Gus Wolter 1st Wednesday, 6:30 p.m. Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund Councilmember Joe Palla 2nd Wednesday, noon (REMIF) City Manager Nina Regor (alt.) (bi‐monthly) Russian River Watershed Ass’n (RRWA) City Manager Nina Regor 4th Thursday, 9:30 a.m. Sonoma Co. Transportation Authority** Mayor Carol Russell 2nd Monday, 3p.m. Councilmember Joe Palla (alt.) Sonoma Co. Waste Management Agency City Manager Nina Regor 3nd Wednesday, 8:00 a.m. (closed session) Councilmember Joe Palla (alt.) Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART)** Mayor Carol Russell 3rd Wednesday, 1:30 p.m. Sonoma Co. Mayor/Council Legislative Councilmember Joe Palla 1st Friday, 9:30 a.m. Committee Mayor Carol Russell (alt.) *NCRA Boardmember is appointed by and represents the Sonoma Co. Mayors & Councilmembers Ass’n. **SCTA membership is mandatory to serve on SMART Board; SMART Boardmember is appointed by and represents the Sonoma Co. Mayors & Councilmembers Ass’n.

(2/10/10) Page 2 of 2 City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 6 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Consent Bruce Kibby/Jerry Haag Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 014-2010 approving a revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Alexander Valley Resort Project Summary The 254-acre Alexander Valley Resort Project was approved by the City Council on June 10, 2009. Approvals included a Specific Plan, prezoning and certification of an Environmental Impact Report. The Project includes development of an 18 hole regulation golf course with an associated practice range, restaurants and pro shop; multi-story hotel with 100 to 150 rooms with a restaurant, meetings rooms, and spa; up to 40 Resort Residential dwellings associated with the Resort Hotel use; up to 105 single family residential uses on individual lots; up to 25 Estate Residential dwellings; a 2.4-acre entry commercial area at the project entrance; open space and conservation areas; a public facilities/water tank site; trails, roads, and utility extensions. City staff was also directed to file a Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation request with the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission. Attachment 3 of the June 10, 2009 City Council staff report was the MMRP, which is a listing of all mitigation measures contained in both the Original 2004 Draft Environmental Impact Report and the 2008 Recirculated Draft EIR. The MMRP contains a listing of the agency responsible for implementing each measure, the agency responsible for monitoring each measure and the schedule for carrying out each mitigation measure. The MMRP also provides for verification of each of the measures, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Due to the complexity of original and revised mitigation measures, after City Council approval of the MMRP it was noted that a number of modifications are needed to ensure full consistency with both of the EIR documents. The attached revision to the MMRP (Attachment 1) makes corrections to include Mitigation Measures 4.4-1 and 4.9-1, re-labels Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 and revises the location of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1. There are no changes to any of the environmental mitigation measures previously approved by the City Council nor are any changes made to the wording of any mitigation measure. Options 1. Take no action on the current MMRP. If this option were to be taken, there would be a number of discrepancies between the approved mitigation measures and the MMRP document. 2. Approve the revised MMRP document, as recommended by City staff.

Budget/Financial Impact There would be no fiscal or budgetary impacts to the City.

Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action 1. Move to approve by title only Resolution No. 014-2010 adopting a revised mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the Alexander Valley Resort project, located on approximately 254 acres of land lying west of Asti Road, west of the Russian River, south of Santana Drive and north of

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) Cloverdale Municipal Airport (APNs 116-260-012; 116-310-013 & -014; 117-050-007, -010, -011, 012, -015, -016, -017, -018 & -019) Attachments: 1. Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, dated January 2010 2. Resolution No. 014-2010 approving a Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Alexander Valley Resort Project

Page 2 Exhibit A to City of Cloverdale Resolution No. 014-2010

Alexander Valley Resort Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

April 2009 Revised January 2010

Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule Plan and Policy Consistency. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale As part of Specific Measure 4.1-2. Include a new Specific Plan policy Community Plan approval LU1.4. Development In addition to the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of Department this Specific Plan, the following Specific Plan land uses shall conform to equivalent General Plan designations as they exist or may be amended: a) The Estate Residential area shall meet the provisions of the Low Medium Density Residential General Plan designation; b) The Single Family Residential area shall meet the provisions of the Medium Density Residential General Plan designation; c) The Resort Residential area shall meet the provision of the High Density Residential General Plan designation; and d) The entire site, including the Resort Hotel/Spa, Golf Course/Open Space, and Natural Resource Preserve shall meet the General Plan provisions for Destination Commercial Area II.

Land Use and Aviation Compatibility. Revised Applicant Cloverdale Prior to approval of Mitigation Measure 5.2-1. Prior to City of Community any Precise Cloverdale action on the draft Specific Plan and Development Development Plan associated land use entitlements, the Project applicants shall secure a consistency determination Department from the Sonoma County ALUC. If the draft Specific Plan is found to be inconsistent, modifications shall Pg 3 Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

be made in the draft Specific Plan to achieve ALUC consistency. In addition, the following requirements shall be met. a) The Precise Development Plan(s) shall meet the requirements of both the CLUP as it now exists and the Cloverdale Airport Master Plan. b) The Precise Development Plan(s) shall ensure that the RSA conforms to CLUP standards (generally elevation at the same grade as the runway, with 95 percent compaction, and no object taller than or divot less than three inches. c) The Precise Development Plan for the golf course shall ensure that: 1) there are no obstructions within a 20:1 imaginary plane starting at the edge of the existing or extended runway 2) no golf holes shall be located within the RPZ; 3) no golf ball trajectories shall extend into the RPZ; 4) any golf paths in the ITZ shall not have obvious stopping points or congregation areas; 5) the RSA shall be fenced to prevent trespass with fending below the 20:1 imaginary surface that is frangible (easily broken); and 6) there shall be no obstructions within the RPZ. d) The Precise Development Plan for the Estate Residential area shall ensure that the density within the ITZ does not exceed 0.2 dwelling unit per acre. e) The Precise Development Plan for the golf course shall ensure that the clubhouse meets the ITZ density standards (max. of 40 persons/acre within the structure), or it is located outside of the ITZ. f) The City shall submit Precise Development Plans for the Estate Residential, Resort Hotel, water reservoir tank and Golf Course components of the Project to the FAA for review to determine if the Plans are Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

acceptable in terms of the City’s grant obligations with respect to airport land use compatibility. If the FAA determines that any of the Precise Development Plans are not acceptable, they shall be modified to achieve compatibility. g) The Precise Development Plan shall identify proposed heights and FAA height limits for the Resort Hotel, Estate Residential and water tank. The Project shall meet FAA height limits unless the FAA grants waivers to height requirements. h) The Project Applicant shall sign an avigation easement for new development within the Sonoma County ALUC Referral Area for the Cloverdale Airport. The avigation easement is to include a provision generally prohibiting intrusion into the air space defined by the FAA imaginary surfaces. The terms of the avigation easement need not be more restrictive than the adopted CLUP policy.

Agricultural Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.3- Applicant Cloverdale Precise Development 1. The Precise Development Plan for the Golf Community Plans for the Golf Course and the Precise Development Plans and Development Course, Single Family tentative subdivision maps for the Single Family Residential and Estate Residential, shall indicate Department Residential and Estate adequate fencing along the northern edge of the Residential areas of golf course, and along the south side of the project the Project and for site, to prevent illegal trespass into the adjacent tentative subdivision vineyards. maps for Single Family and Estate Residential area.

Agricultural Resources. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Prior to approval of Measure 5.3-1. Prior to issuance of a grading Community grading permit for the Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

permit for the portion of golf course that includes Development portion of the golf prime agricultural soils, the Project developer shall Department course that contains either: a) Secure a conservation easement in the northern prime agricultural soils Sonoma County area which is equal to the acreage of prime agricultural soils which are converted from agricultural use. The location, size and terms of the easement shall be approved by the Cloverdale City Manager; or b) Make a financial contribution to a non-profit organization that has as its objective the purpose of preserving prime farmland in Sonoma County in an amount approved by the Cloverdale City Manager; or c) Provide an equivalent mitigation for loss of prime agricultural land suitable to the Cloverdale City Manager.

Agricultural Resources. Revised Mitigation Applicant Sonoma County Local Prior to annexation, if Measure 5.3-2. If requested by LAFCO, the Agency Formation Williamson Contract is applicant shall request the Sonoma County Board Commission still in force of Supervisors to rescind the Williamson Act contract on the 15-acre former Silverado parcel under Government Code Section 51256 prior to submitting a petition of annexation for that portion of the project site subject to the Williamson Act to LAFCO.

Geology, Soils and Seismicity. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Measure 4.4-1. Community a) All structures shall be designed and constructed Development a) Prior to issuance of in conformance with the most recently adopted California Building Code requirements for Department a building permit seismic design. . b) The applicant shall incorporate all b) Included in each recommendations of the geotechnical Precise Development investigation into all Precise Development Plans Plan. submitted for the project. c) The Precise Development Plan for the c) Included in Precise Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

commercial center shall encourage each Development Plan for commercial facility to prepare and implement an commercial center Earthquake Preparedness and Response Plan.

Geology, Solis and Seismicity Mitigation Measure Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific 4.4-2. Potential slope instability impacts associated Community Plan with the proposed project shall be mitigated by Development incorporation of the following policies into the draft Specific Plan: Department a) A qualified geotechnical firm shall be retained to prepare a site specific geotechnical report, which identifies specific geologic hazards and presents geotechnical solutions regarding slope stability and soil conditions. b) All grading plans, cut and fill slopes, compaction procedures, and retaining structures shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer and inspected during construction by a Registered Professional Engineer (or representative) or Certified Engineering Geologist (or representative). All designs shall be submitted with, and approved by, Precise Development Plans. c) Final grading plans, when prepared, shall be reviewed by a Registered Professional Engineer to ensure that the detailed plans conform with the intent of the preliminary geotechnical report. d) A self-perpetuating slope maintenance program (i.e., a program that has an ongoing funding mechanism) shall be established (to be managed by a project site Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

business and/or homeowners association or similar entity) that includes annual inspections of slopes, debris benches, and v- ditches. Any accumulation of slope detritus on the benches or in the v- ditches shall be promptly removed. The association shall also be responsible for repair of any slope failures that may occur on the cut slopes along the northern portion of the site. An annual report documenting the inspection and any remedial action conducted shall be submitted to the Cloverdale Community Development Department for review. e) Mitigation Measure 4.7-1, which requires detailed analysis and mitigation of the grading and visual impacts related to construction of the access road and golf hole 17, shall be implemented.

Geology, Solis and Seismicity. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.4-4. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policy: Development Potential impacts associated with the moderate Department to high shrink-swell potential of soils within the proposed project site shall be mitigated by the following measures a) All recommendations of the geotechnical investigation regarding expansive soils shall be incorporated into the project design. b) To the extent practicable, designs for all common landscaped areas shall incorporate low water-need plantings to Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

minimize the potential for damage associated with pavements, utilities, and structures from expansive soils. The use of similar landscaping should be encouraged at individual parcels by providing information to new tenants regarding the relationship between irrigation and subsequent property damage. A document, which describes the potential for damage from expansive soils from over-irrigation and includes solutions, such as drought- tolerant plant material and drip irrigation systems, shall be prepared by the applicant for individual buildings and provided to all occupants of the proposed commercial and industrial facilities.

Geology, Soils and Seismicity. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 5.4-1. Community Plan The draft Specific Plan shall be amended to include Development the following policies: a) The site-specific geotechnical report shall Department specifically address the potential hazards associated with use of wood waste materials as fill. Fill containing wood waste shall not be placed under any proposed habitable structures, access roadways, or major utility corridors, such as water and wastewater lines, unless the geotechnical report finds that the specific use of the fill is not hazardous. b) All recommendations of the geotechnical investigation regarding mitigation of potential problems associated with the use of on-site materials (including wood waste) as fill shall be incorporated into the final project design. c) In those areas where the wood waste is proposed as a component of fill, such as the golf course, differential fill thicknesses shall be minimized. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

d) The golf course or other owners shall be responsible for any repairs or regarding required as a result of settlements from the areas underlain by fill containing wood waste.

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Hydrology and Water Quality. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.5-1. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policies: Development a) The applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Departments designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project. The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential water quality impacts associated with implementation of the project. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to mitigate construction related pollutants. These controls shall include practices to minimize the contact of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with storm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain. b) A precise SWPPP shall be prepared for each Precise Development Plan application. Each SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, and must include both dry and wet weather inspections. City of Cloverdale personnel shall conduct regular inspections to ensure compliance with the SWPPP. c) The project design shall include measures designed to mitigate potential water quality degradation of runoff from all portions of the completed development, including roof and sidewalk runoff. The final design team for the project should review Start at the Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 11 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Source, Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection (BASMAA, 1999).

Hydrology and Water Quality. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.5-2. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policies: Development a) Potential water quality impacts associated with the proposed project shall be mitigated Departments by the preparation and implementation of a Water Quality Management Plan. The Water Quality Management Plan shall be developed so that, when properly implemented, it will reduce or eliminate impacts to surface water quality from golf course operation and maintenance. b) To minimize golf course runoff into nearby creeks, a minimum of a ten-foot natural vegetated buffer shall be maintained between the edge of irrigated turfgrass and the top of the bank of drainages, including Porterfield Creek and the ephemeral drainages in the central portion of the site. To the extent practicable, golf course grading shall be designed so that all maintained turf areas drain away from nearby creeks. Drainage shall be directed to grassed swales, area drains, or sumps for percolation. Drainage from turf areas shall be encouraged to enter the new lakes planned for the golf course. Where maintained turf cannot drain away from creeks, low maintenance turf shall be used or the area shall be considered for naturalized or native grasses. c) The grading and drainage plans shall indicate the direction of flow of golf course drainage. Areas of maintained turf grass that drain toward storm water conveyances Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

shall be minimized and identified on the grading plans. Areas of the golf course that drain toward storm water conveyances shall be separated by vegetated natural buffer areas, as identified above, or use low maintenance turfgrasses. Areas of high maintenance such as tees, fairways, and greens shall not drain into storm water conveyances. d) To manage discharge from subdrains, drain pipe discharge points from subdrains of greens or tees shall drain into vegetated swales or irrigation storage lakes. The subdrain discharge points shall not be within 100 feet of a drainage. Discharge pipes shall be directed to dense turf grass areas that can act as a biotic filter and allow percolation. The potentially fertilizer-rich runoff should result in dense biofilter development, enhancing pollutant removal efficiency. This potential dense grow-in should be anticipated by swale designers to allow adequate flow capacity within the swales. The location of all drainages shall be indicated on the grading and drainage plans. e) Runoff shall be recycled back into the irrigation system through use of irrigation storage lakes as collectors, wherever possible. These requirements shall be indicated on the irrigation plans. f) An Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) shall be prepared by a qualified agronomist or turf grass specialist approved by the City. The IPM shall be approved prior to the seeding and germination of turfgrass. The IPMP shall address and recommend methods of pest prevention and turfgrass management that use Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

pesticides as a last resort in pest control. Types and rates of fertilizer and pesticide application shall be specified. Special attention in the IPMP shall be directed toward avoiding runoff of pesticides and nitrates into storm water conveyances or leaching into the shallow groundwater table. See also Mitigation Measure 4.6-5. g) The use of pesticides shall be minimized on the golf course. Pesticides shall be used only in response to a persistent pest problem. Preventive chemical use shall only be employed in limited situations where other methods will not be successful and by a licensed technician. Cultural and biological approaches to pest control shall be more fully integrated into the IPM with an emphasis toward reducing pesticide application. h) Fertilizer use shall be managed on the project site. Fertilizer requirements for turfgrass germination and maturation can be lowered by ensuring topsoil is maintained or replaced during grading operations to sustain the organic quality of the native soil. Organic amendments, such as sludge, manure, fir bark, or peat, greatly increase the organic quality of the soil and greatly reduce fertilizer needs. These organic amendments also increase percolation rates and act as stronger binder for the absorption of fertilizer and pesticide compounds. Soil tests shall be performed prior to seeding to determine the proper fertilization rates pre- and post-seeding. The IPM shall detail how fertilization requirements are to be reduced during turfgrass grow-in. i) The Water Quality Management Plan shall Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

include a monitoring component. The monitoring component shall be designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the SWPPP (discussed above) and Water Quality Management Plan at protecting water quality in the vicinity of the site. The monitoring component of the plan shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the city of Cloverdale for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. The Plan shall include the following: •Sampling locations. The Plan shall establish fixed surface water sampling locations. Surface water samples shall be collected from detention basin outlets during the first significant storm event of the rainy season each year ("first flush''). In addition, surface water samples shall be collected from creeks that drain the proposed golf course. •Sampling parameters, protocols, and frequency. The Plan shall establish the compounds to be analyzed for based on the uses of the site. For example, samples collected from areas that drain the golf course shall be analyzed for the specific pesticide and herbicide compounds used on the course. The Plan shall also establish the required sampling protocols and frequency for each sampling event so that consistent high quality data can be compiled. •Data analysis and review. The Plan shall establish criteria for evaluating the data (e.g., regulatory threshold values for pollutants). Once collected, the data shall be analyzed by a qualified professional and compared to the established criteria Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 15 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

to evaluate potential impacts. If water quality degradation is identified, the qualified professional shall recommend actions to mitigate the impact. Reports summarizing the analytical data and conclusions shall be submitted to the city of Cloverdale for review and approval on an annual basis.

Hydrology and Water Quality. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.5-3. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policy: Development A qualified professional hydrologist or engineer Department shall be retained to design the storm drainage collection system and detention basin. The basin shall be of adequate size to retain enough water during storm events that the peak flow in the Russian River during storm events is not increased. The proposed drainage plan shall: 1) not increase peak flows downstream of the project site during the 10-, 50-, and 100-year storm events; 2) include an evaluation of downstream drainage features to handle existing and proposed flow conditions; and 3) be designed in compliance with all City of Cloverdale standards for construction.

Hydrology and Water Quality. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 5.5-1. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include a policy stating that Development maintenance of Russian River levees on the Project Site is the responsibility of the Sonoma County Department Water Agency. The project property owner shall cooperate with the Agency as needed to ensure appropriate levee maintenance, specifically by allowing access to the levee area.

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Public Health and Safety. Mitigation Measure 4.6- Applicant Cloverdale As part of Specific 2. The draft Specific Plan shall be amended to Community Plan approval include the following policies: Development a) A site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for construction activities shall be prepared Department for the project by a qualified industrial hygienist. At a minimum, the HSP shall summarize information collected in environmental investigations for the project site, including soil and groundwater quality data; establish soil and groundwater mitigation and control specifications for grading and construction activities, including health and safety provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers and the general public; provide procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unreported contamination is discovered; incorporate construction safety measures for excavation activities; establish procedures for the safe storage and use of hazardous materials at the project site, if necessary; provide emergency response procedures; and designate personnel responsible for implementation of the HSP. The HSP shall be submitted to the City of Cloverdale for review and approval. b) A Construction Hazardous Materials Management Plan (CHMMP) shall be prepared for the project to address the safe management and disposal of hazardous materials that may be encountered during project construction. The CHMMP for each portion of the site shall be submitted with the Precise Development Plan application. The CHMMP shall include procedures for managing soils and groundwater removed from the site to ensure that any excavated Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

soils and/or dewatered groundwater with contaminants are stored, managed, and disposed of safely, in accordance with applicable regulations, and designate personnel responsible for implementation of the CHMMP. The CHMMP shall also incorporate notification and dust mitigation requirements for construction in areas containing naturally-occurring asbestos (including Title 17, CCR Section 93105). Coordination with RWQCB shall be performed, as required, to ensure that provisions of the CHMMP do not interfere with remediation and reclamation projects at the site. The CHMMP shall be submitted to the city of Cloverdale for review and approval. Separate CHMMPs may be submitted for the separate elements of the project, including Clean Closure of the Wood Waste Landfill, Residential, Golf Course, Hotel, Spa, and Commercial Mixed Use phases.

Public Health and Safety. Mitigation Measure 4.6- Applicant Cloverdale As part of Specific 3. The draft Specific Plan shall include the following Community Plan approval policy: Development The Health and Safety Plan (HSP) and Construction Department Hazardous Materials Management Plan (CHMMP) shall establish procedures for the safe storage and use of hazardous materials at the project site, if necessary; provide emergency response procedures in the case of a hazardous materials release; and designate personnel responsible for implementation of the plans.

Public Health and Safety. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 5.6-1. The Specific Plan shall contain Community Plan policies to ensure that State Department of Health Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Services, Regional Water Quality Control Board Development and other applicable standards and requirements Department are met prior to the use of recycled water on the site in order to protect the environmental and minimize human contact with recycled water and provision of adequate public notice of the use of recycled water.

Public Health and Safety. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Prior to approval of Measure 5.6-2. Engineering and Precise Development a) Prior to regulatory closure of the former Community Plans for affected Masonite facility site, written approval from the RWQCB shall be required for all Development area construction and grading in those areas to Department ensure that proposed development activities do not interfere with investigation or remedial activities. b) Prior to regulatory closure of the former Masonite facility site, additional groundwater extraction wells at the site may be permitted only as determined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No new groundwater extraction wells shall be drilled or used unless approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. c) Prior to regulatory closure of the former Masonite facility site, irrigation in those areas with well water shall only be permitted as allowed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Public Health and Safety. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 5.6-3. The Specific Plan shall contain the Community Plan following policies: Development a) A Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) and Risk Management Plan (RMP) shall be prepared Department by a qualified environmental professional, as approved by the City of Cloverdale. The HHRA shall evaluate potential health risks from Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

petroleum hydrocarbons, metals, dioxins, furans, and wood preservation compounds proposed to remain in soils and groundwater following remedial activities at the project site and clean closure of the wood waste landfill. The RMP shall incorporate the findings of the HHRA and include measures to ensure that any potential added health risks to future site users as a result of hazardous materials are reduced to a cumulative risk of less than one in a million (10-6) for carcinogens and a cumulative hazard index of 1.0 for non-carcinogens. The potential risks to human health in excess of these goals may be reduced either by remediation of the contaminated soils or groundwater. The HHRA and RMP shall be submitted to the RWQCB for approval. b) Water quality testing for extracted potable groundwater from the project site shall be implemented, as currently required by state regulations (Titles 17 and 22, California Code of Regulations). Extracted potable groundwater used for any beneficial purpose at the site shall meet state regulations or site-specific water quality criteria, as established by the RWQCB, whichever is more stringent.

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Public Health and Safety. Mitigation Measure Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific 4.6-5. The draft Specific Plan shall include the Community Plan following policy: Development An Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) for the Department project site shall be developed to ensure judicious use of pesticides, which must be applied by state- certified applicators in accordance with existing laws and regulations. The IPM shall include advancedtechnology and monitoring equipment to ensure minimal application of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. The IPM shall require use of slow-release, less soluble, and least mobile chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides available and use of the smallest rates of active ingredient to accomplish the desired result. Where feasible, the IPM shall specify drought, pest, and disease resistant plant species for the project site,and use natural buffer areas to minimize the area affected by chemical use. Aerial spraying of agricultural chemicals shall be prohibited. The IPM shall be submitted to the City of Cloverdale for review and approval.

Visual Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Amend the draft Specific Plan to include the Community Plan following policies: a) A visual analysis shall be submitted with Development each Precise Development Plan. The visual Department analysis shall describe specific grading, landscaping, and revegetation plans, as well as design details, and ensure that development is consistent with General Plan and Specific Plan policies. The visual analysis shall also ensure that development is consistent with the "gateway" or entrance theme, as outlined in Mitigation Measure 4.7-2. b) Visual analysis of grading proposed for the Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 21 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

western hill with the serpentine outcropping shall be prepared with the first Precise Development Plan proposed for the project and submitted along with the proposed "gateway" theme (see Mitigation Measure 4.7-2). c) The visual analysis for golf hole 17 shall show the impacts of grading needed to develop the hole. It shall also include an analysis of potential golf trajectories that might affect Asti Road and U.S. Highway 101, including any screen structures necessary to protect the streets from golf balls. Golf hole 17 shall be relocated to the base of the hill if the visual analysis for the golf course shows grading and visual impacts that are not consistent with General Plan standards. d) The southern access road shall be relocated to minimize impacts to the existing serpentine outcropping visible from U.S. Highway 101. This alternative would also serve to reduce potential impacts to the native grasslands near the serpentine outcropping (see Mitigation Measure 4.9- 3a). Alternatively, contour grading for the road that more closely approximates the natural slope shall be required rather than a uniform cut slope. e) The northerly Estate Residential cul-de-sac and the Estate and Single Family lots in the vicinity of the Emergency Vehicle Access shall be designed to preserve the woodlands, native grasslands, and riparian corridor as visual, as well as natural, assets. f) A model or visual simulation of the proposed Estate and Single Family housing shall be provided with the Precise Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Development Plan applications, and shall include landscaping or other means to soften the view of the developed housing from the City. g) A model or visual simulation of he proposed hotel shall be provided with the Precise Development Plan application.

Visual Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.7-2. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Amend the draft Specific Plan to include the Community Plan following policy based on policies in the Cloverdale General Plan: Development Department The applicant shall submit a "gateway" or entrance theme along with the visual analysis for the western hill with the serpentine outcropping to be reviewed and approved by the City with the first submitted Precise Development Plan.

Visual Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.7-3. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Amend the draft Specific Plan to include the Community Plan following policy: Development The plans for construction of the project's water Department tank shall be subject to prior approval by the City. The water tank plans shall include proposed landscaping and design details to ensure that the tank, and the access road to the tank, are blended visually into the existing oak grove and hillside and that the tank and road do not degrade the scenic views of the hillside from U.S. Highway 101 and the City below. The plans shall include retention of all oak trees, augmented with the planting of additional native trees, as necessary, to screen the tank and road from public view. The plans shall include an appropriate paint color, e.g., an earth tone, to ensure the tank will blend into the existing visual environment.

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 23 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Visual Resources. Revised Mitigation Measure Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific 5.7-1. The following components shall be included in Community Plan the final Specific Plan document: Development a) The Precise Development Plans for the Resort Hotel and Entry Commercial area shall include Department provisions prohibiting use of reflective glass, unpainted railings or other architectural features that would cause glare off the Project site. b) Precise Development Plans for the Resort Hotel complex, Estate Residential, Single Family Residential and Entry Commercial components shall include provisions for equipping street lights, parking lot lights and yard lights with cut-off lenses or equivalent to reduce spill over of light and glare.

Cultural Resources. Revised Mitigation Measure Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific 5.8-1 The Specific Plan shall contain the following Community Plan policies: Development a) A cultural review of CA-SON-1988H by a qualified archeologist shall be submitted with Department each Precise Development Plan application. The cultural review shall include recommendations for treatment of significant resources on that respective site. b) Subsurface investigation within a 50-foot radius of the CA-SON-1988H residential complex within the site property shall be monitored by a qualified site archeologist and shall follow any recommendations included in “a,” above. If subsurface resources are exposed, construction shall stop until the resource can be identified and evaluated by the qualified archeologist. Recommendations could include site testing and data recovery. This requirement shall be included on Project construction plans and specifications.

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

c) Placement of staging areas, equipment yards, laydown areas and related construction activities that could result in subsurface impacts shall be prohibited within or adjacent to the recorded archaeological sites. d) Exclusionary fencing to create a “no trespass” zone shall be placed at each recorded archaeological site to avoid inadvertent trespass during construction. Fencing may be removed with the written permission of a qualified archeologist retained by the City of Cloverdale. e) If a Precise Development Plan proposes removal or modification of CA-Son-2322H and/or CA-Son-1988-H), photographic documentation of the resource shall be prepared and submitted. Efforts shall focus on obtaining general viewshed views, features, close-ups of feature details, and other views sufficient to document the setting of the alignment prior to modification. Recordation shall use fine-grain black and white film and provide at least two sets of proof sheets and photographs no smaller than 5 by 7 inches and archivally processed. Each set shall be filed in a presentation binder suitable for deposit with a local public library and the California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, CSU Sonoma. The site record form shall be updated to indicate enhanced photographic record and any new information noted during recordation.

Cultural Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.8-2. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific The draft Specific Plan shall be amended to Community Plan include the following policies: a) Any excavation contract (or contracts for Development other activities that may have subsurface Department soil impacts) shall include language that Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 25 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

alerts construction personnel of the potential for exposing aboveground elements (i.e., Northwestern Pacific Railroad) and subsurface archaeological deposits (i.e., CA-Son-1988H), and the project's procedures for treating such finds. Language shall include a provision that, upon discovery of buried archaeological materials, work in the immediate area of the find shall be halted within 50 feet of the find and a qualified archaeologist consulted for recommendations. b) A background briefing shall be provided for supervisory construction personnel describing the potential for impacting and/or exposing cultural resources and anticipated procedures to treat unexpected discoveries. These procedures shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist and submitted to the City for review prior to construction. c) If buried or suspected human remains are encountered during construction, work in that area shall be immediately halted and the county coroner notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American, then the Native American Heritage Commission will be notified by the coroner within 24 hours as required by Public Resources Code 5097. The Native American Heritage Commission will notify a designated Most Likely Descendant who will provide recommendations for the treatment of the remains within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission will mediate any disputes regarding treatment of remains.

Biological Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.9- 1. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 26 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

a) Amend the Specific Plan as follows: •The proposed site plan (Land Use/Circulation) shall be revised to designate important stands of oak woodlands and other “High/Moderate Constraint” biological resources as Natural Resource Preserves;. Draft Specific Plan Policy NRC2.4 shall be revised to indicate that healthy trees shall be avoided and preserved to the maximum extent feasible, particularly specimen valley oaks and other native deciduous oaks and stands of oak woodlands designated as Natural Resource Preserves. A Tree Preservation and Replacement Program shall be prepared, which shall detail tree avoidance and preservation methods, including establishment of a tree protection zone, construction inspection and supervision by a certified arborist, installation of tree protection fencing, review of activities within the tree protection zone and provisions to provide for replacement where tree replacement is unavoidable. b)The applicant shall submit the Tree Preservation and Replacement Program to be reviewed and approved by the City of Cloverdale Community Development Department with the first submitted Precise Development Plan. The applicant’s site development plan and preliminary grading concept plan shall be revised to provide for the protection of individual trees considered suitable for preservation. Tree trunk locations shall be mapped by engineered survey and considered during refinement of detailed plans for the project. A qualified arborist shall be retained to evaluate the suitability of individual trees and work with the applicant’s engineer in refining proposed grading and development plans to Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 27 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

minimize tree loss, Where tree avoidance is determined to be infeasible, native trees shall be planted as part of a detailed Landscape and Vegetation management Plan to provide for replacement of trees lost at a minimum of 3:1 (replacement:lost trees). c) The applicant shall submit a detailed Landscape and Vegetation management Plan to be reviewed and approved by the City of Cloverdale Community Development Department with the first submitted Precise Development Plan. The Landscape and Vegetation management Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect in consultation with a plant ecologist experienced in management of native species. The Plan shall: 1) provide for re-establishment of native vegetation along the central drainage and other areas to be preserved as open space; 2) provide details on native plantings associated with proposed restoration, enhancement and mitigation; 3) provide for relocation or replacement of trees removed by the project; 4) identify unsuitable species that should not be used in landscaping in open space areas; 5) prevent the establishment and spread of introduced broom; and 6) specify long-term management provisions to ensure establishment of landscape improvements and creek enhancement plantings. Aspects of the Plan shall include the following: •Landscaping and revegetation shall emphasize the use of native plant species in proposed open space areas, including the central drainage and fringe of the oak woodlands to be preserved. The landscape architect and plant ecologist shall identify suitable plant species. Suitable species for use in these areas include valley oak, live Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 28 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

oak, California buckeye, willow, toyon, California rose, California blackberry and common rush, among others. •Use of non-native, invasive species that may spread into adjacent open space areas shall be prohibited in landscape plans. Unsuitable species include: eucalyptus, acacia, pampas grass, broom, gorse and giant reed. •Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent establishment and spread of French and Scotch broom. The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants where soils are saturated and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. •Provisions for maintenance of landscaping and revegetation of graded slopes shall be specified as part of the plan, with replacement plantings and seeding provided over a minimum of five years to ensure re- establishment of cover.

Biological Resources. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 5.9-1. Community Plan a) The Specific Plan shall include: Development i) The proposed site plan shall be revised to designate portions of the identified native Department grasslands and other High/Moderate Constraint” biological resources as Natural Resource Preserves, if feasible and consistent with the site plan. ii) A policy shall be included in the Specific Plan stating that native grasslands shall be protected and enhanced, and that adequate replacement provided where complete avoidance is not feasible. A Native Grassland

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 29 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Protection, Replacement and Restoration Plan shall be prepared and approved by the Cloverdale Community Development Department prior to grading. b) The applicant shall submit the Native Grassland Protection, Replacement and Restoration Plan to be reviewed and approved by the Cloverdale Community Development Department with the first submitted Precise Development Plan. A qualified vegetation ecologist shall prepare the Native Grassland Plan which shall clearly identify the total grassland area affected by the Project, provide for protection and enhancement of existing native grasslands where feasible and define a program for replacement through creation of new native grassland habitat on-site. The site plan and grading plan shall provide for at least partial preservation of native grassland stands, particularly the serpentine grasslands in the western portion of the Site. The proposed limits of grading shall be adjusted to provide for avoidance of at least portions of both stands of native grasslands on the site and those areas protected as permanent open space. c) Native grasslands lost as a result of development shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 1:1 and preferably consolidated in one location. The relative cover class of the replacement grasslands shall have a native species component that meets or exceeds that of grasslands removed. Any provisions for preservation, creation or enhancement of on- site native grasslands shall be incorporated as a component of the Landscape and Vegetation management Plan. If the native grasslands cannot be replaced with a sustainable 1:1 ratio, the grading plan and Precise Development Plan(s) shall be modified to retain native grasslands in their existing locations. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 30 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Biological Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.9-3. Applicant Cloverdale a) A preconstruction survey for raptors shall Community a) Prior to issuance be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist prior to initiation of grading and Development of any grading tree removal to confirm the presence or Department permit on the absence of any nesting activity on the site. project site If a nesting raptor is found, appropriate measures shall be taken to avoid destruction of an active nest. An appropriate buffer zone shall be established around any active nest based on informal consultation with CDFG representatives.Construction activities shall be restricted in this zone until the qualified biologist has determined that nesting is complete and the young birds have fledged. b) A preconstruction survey for red-legged b) Prior to issuance of frog shall be conducted by a qualified a grading permit wildlife biologist prior to initiation of grading adjacent to wetlands and removal or modification of any of the ponds on the site to confirm the absence of or other waters of the this species. If any red-legged frogs are United States found, appropriate measures shall be taken to avoid loss during grading and vegetation removal. Representatives of the USFWS shall be informally consulted to confirm that the subpopulation in the Cloverdale vicinity is not considered to be part of the California red-legged frog subspecies. An appropriate buffer zone shall be established around any location where red-legged frogs are encountered. As necessary, exclusionary fencing shall be installed to separate the construction zone from preserved habitat, and construction activities shall be restricted from this zone until construction is completed and the fencing removed. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 31 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Biological Resources. Mitigation 4.9-4. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific a) Amend the draft Specific Plan as follows: Community Plan i) The proposed site plan shall be revised to designate identified important Development jurisdictional wetlands and other Department High/Moderate Constraint” biological resources as Natural Resource Preserves; ii) A new policy shall be included in the draft Specific Plan stating that wetlands shall be protected and enhanced, and adequate replacement provided where complete avoidance is not feasible. A Conceptual Wetland Protection, Replacement, and Restoration Plan shall be prepared and approved by the city of Cloverdale Community Development Department prior to any grading. b) The applicant shall submit the Conceptual Wetland Protection, Replacement, and Restoration Plan to be reviewed and approved by the city of Cloverdale Community Development Department with the first submitted Precise Development Plan. A qualified wetland consultant shall prepare a wetland plan that satisfies adopted standards and criteria of the City, Corps, RWQCB, and CDFG. The wetland plan shall clearly identify the total wetland and other jurisdictional area affected by the project, provide for protection and enhancement of existing wetlands where feasible, and define a program for wetland replacement through creation of new wetland habitat on-site. The conceptual wetland plan shall be completed and approved prior to any modification or loss of wetlands on the site. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 32 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

If wetland habitat is to be created as part of mitigation, wetlands shall be replaced at a minimum 1 to 1 ratio and any small, isolated features shall preferably be consolidated. Any provisions for preservation, creation, or enhancement of on-site wetlands shall be incorporated as a component of the Landscape and Vegetation Management Plan. Details shall be provided for any created wetland habitat, including the following: i) Identify the location(s) of mitigation areas. Replacement habitat shall result in created or enhanced wetlands with a higher habitat value than the existing wetlands eliminated as a result of development to mitigate the temporal loss until the replacement wetlands have met success criteria. ii) Specify performance criteria, maintenance and long-term management responsibilities, monitoring requirements, and contingency measures. Monitoring shall be provided for a minimum of five years and continue until the success criteria are met. iii) Define site preparation and revegetation procedures, an implementation schedule, and funding sources to ensure long-term management of the overall wetland mitigation plan. c) A detailed Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared and implemented during construction as called for in Mitigation Measure 4.5-1. The plan shall contain Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 33 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

detailed measures to control erosion of stockpiled earth and exposed soil, provide for revegetation of graded slopes before the first rainy season following construction, and specify procedures for monitoring the plan's effectiveness.

Biological Resources. Mitigation Measure 4.9-5 Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific a) The draft Specific Plan shall be amended Community Plan to include the following policy based on Cloverdale General Plan implementation Development program A-9 in the Conservation and Department Open Space Element and the Creek Ordinance: i) Vineyards, residential lots, and golf course features shall not encroach into river and creek buffer areas to be preserved under the Conceptual Wetland Protection, Replacement, and Restoration Plan, which shall be consistent with the intent of the Conservation and Open Space Element, and the setback requirements in the city of Cloverdale Creek Ordinance. b) Implement Mitigation Measure 4.9-1(a) and (b).

Transportation and Circulation. Revised Applicant Cloverdale As determined by City Mitigation Measure 5.10-1. The Project applicant Engineering Engineer shall install a traffic signal at the South Cloverdale Department Blvd./ Overcrossing intersection to improve AM peak traffic operations to LOS B. As part of signal installation at this location, the westbound right-turn movement from the S. Interchange northbound onto S. Cloverdale Boulevard shall be channelized (as under current existing conditions) and be under “Yield” control. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 34 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Transportation and Circulation. Revised Applicant Cloverdale As determined by City Mitigation Measure 5.10-2. The Project applicant Engineering Engineer shall install a traffic signal at this intersection to Department improve AM and PM peak operating conditions. The applicant shall be eligible for cost reimbursement from other contributing development projects as approved by the City of Cloverdale.

Transportation and Circulation. Revised Applicant Cloverdale As determined by City Mitigation Measure 5.10-3.The South Cloverdale Community Engineer Interchange overcrossing/Asti Road intersection Development shall be widened and/or re-striped to provide the Department following circulation improvements for all four approach legs (east, west, north and south):

One (1) left-turn lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. The east-west approach legs of the S. Interchange and Project access shall be stop-sign controlled.

Transportation and Circulation. Revised Applicant Cloverdale As determined by City Mitigation Measure 5.10-4. Should roundabouts be Community Engineer installed at the South Cloverdale Interchange Development Overcrossing, the Project owner shall contribute a Department proportional share towards the cost of installation for these roundabouts or other traffic control devices.

Transportation and Circulation. Revised Applicant Cloverdale As part of applicable Mitigation Measure 5.10-5. Applicable Precise Community Precise Development Development Plans shall provide that the Developer Development Plans dedicate a public access easement to the City and complete a multi-use recreation trail from the Project Department area to the proposed SMART trail, if possible, and to the levee trail. If, after reasonable attempts, the Developer is unable to provide needed rights-of-way over private properties to connect the trail to public rights-of-way, the City shall assist the Developer in Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 35 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

securing those rights-of-way through a filing with the Public Utilities Commission. The Developer shall provide the City with sufficient rights-of-way (as determined by the City Engineer and Community Development Director) on the Project site to complete the trail. Trail improvements shall be constructed by the Developer or, if Developer is unable to obtain the needed rights-of-way, such construction costs may be bonded, if bonding is approved by the City Council.

Transportation and Circulation, Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.10-.7. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policy: Development The design of the interior project streets shall include Department golf cart crossing signs at all crossing points. A minimum of a five-foot concrete sidewalk or an all- weather walkwayshould be provided on all streets providing access to uses that will generate pedestrian traffic.

Transportation and Circulation, Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.10-8. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policy: Development The project site design shall include a pedestrian Department and bicycle trail connection to the trail along the Russian River. This could be accomplished by proposing an alignment through or around the golf course, or by acquiring an easement from an adjacent property owner, e.g., establishing a trail connection through adjacent property along Porterfield Creek.

Transportation and Circulation. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.10-10. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policies: Development Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 36 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

Department i) The Precise Development Plans for the entry commercial commercial component shall include parking that complies with City of Cloverdale standards; ii) The Precise Development Plans for the golf/clubhouse shall provide adequate parking to serve peak parking demand for banquet services. The Precise Development Plan shall include parking that compies with City of Cloverdale parking standards. Shared parking may be proposed between golfing and banquet facilitied if the uses have different peaking characteristics.

Transportation and Circulation. Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Measure 4.10-11. The draft Specific Plan shall be Community Plan amended to include the following policy: Development The Precise Development Plan for any residential Department component of the project shall designate safe routes for school children to walk to City schools and shall specify whether and how busing would be provided.

Air Quality. Revised Mitigation Measure 5.11-1. Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific The Specific Plan shall include the following. Community Plan Construction plans for the project shall include a list of Best Management Practices to reduce Development construction dust, including, but not limited to, the Department following specific measures as recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District: a. All trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials off of the project site shall be covered with tarpaulins or other effective covers. b. Water or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site. c. The speed of all vehicles traveling on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

d. Paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas shall be swept with a water sweeper. e. Exposed stockpiles shall be managed in accordance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, Waste Discharge Requirements, and/or other permits, as appropriate. f. Excavation and grading activities shall be terminated when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. g. The area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activities shall be limited at any one time.

Air Quality. Mitigation Measure 4.11-2. The draft Applicant Cloverdale Included in Specific Specific Plan shall be amended to include the Community Plan following policy: Development Construction plans for the project shall contain a list Department of Best Management Practices to reduce construction emissions, including the following specific measures: a) Idle time of combustion engine construction equipment used at the site shall be confined to five minutes. b) Equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. c) Alternative fueled or electrical construction equipment shall be used at the project site, when feasible. d) Construction equipment used shall have the minimum practical engine size for the job e) Gasoline-powered equipment shall be equipped with catalytic converters, whenfeasible.

Air Quality. Mitigation Measure 4.11-5. The Applicant Cloverdale Included in final Precise Development Plans for the residential Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 38 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

components of the project, and other components Community Building building plans that have fireplaces, shall include the installation of Department only gas-fired fireplaces.

Air Quality. Revised Mitigation Measure 5.11-2. Applicant Cloverdale Prior to approval of The Precise Development Plans for the golf course Community the Precise and vineyard areas of the project shall include the following measures: Development Development Plan a) A 100-foot setback or buffer between any Department that includes the golf vineyards and nearby residences so long as course and vineyard landscaping or fencing is also provided between residences and vineyards. b) Use of barriers, such as walls or hedges, along the project boundary in the vicinity of any vineyards to intercept wind blown dust.

Noise. Mitigation Measure 4.12-1. The draft Applicant Cloverdale As part of Specific Specific Plan shall be amended to include the Community Plan approval following policy: Development Construction plans for the project shall include Department the following measures: a) Noise-generating construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, as regulated by Cloverdale Subdivision General Notes. Work on Saturdays will not be allowed unless specific approvals are obtained from the city of Cloverdale. b) All internal combustion engine driven equipment shall be fitted with mufflers in good operating condition. c) A traffic plan shall be formulated to route construction traffic as far away from residential buildings as possible.

Noise. Revised Mitigation Measure 5.12-1. The Applicant Cloverdale Included in Precise Precise Development Plan for the Estate Community Development Plan for Residential portion of the project shall include a Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 39 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

detailed Acoustic Study and recommend measures Development Estate Residential to reduce anticipated rail and airport noise, while Department ensuring that natural features such as oak woodlands are not affected by noise attenuation. The Acoustic Study shall recommend specific measures, such as sound barriers, walls, or trees, as needed to reduce CNEL levels for the exterior areas of Estate Residential homes to 65 dBA outside. The Acoustic Study shall also include a requirement that an avigation easement is granted by the property owner and a fair disclosure covenant is recorded for all homes constructed within the 55 to 65 dBA airport noise contours, as measured for existing and future runway extensions, if adopted by the ALUC.

Public Services and Utilities. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale Prior to open of golf Measure 5.13-1. Prior to the opening of the golf Community course course, the Project developer shall prepare a water Development and contingency plan that would ensure a replacement or supplemental water supply can be provided for Engineering the Project. The Contingency Plan shall be Departments approved by the Cloverdale Public Works Director.

Public Services and Utilities. Revised Mitigation Applicant Cloverdale a) Fee payment prior to Measure 5.13-2.The Applicant shall be required to Engineering issuance of building pay sewer impact fees and construct a pump station Department permits somewhere on the lower portion of the site to pump effluent to the existing force main that is stubbed to the site south of the cul-de-sac off Santana Drive, if b) Construction of needed. pump station to be determined by City Engineer.

Public Services and Utilities. Revised Mitigation Applicant Measure 5.13-3. The draft Specific Plan shall be amended to include the following policies: a) Cloverdale a) Included in Precise Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 40 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

a) The Precise Development Plan for the Community Development Plan residential, hotel/spa, and commercial Development for Resort Hotel components of the project shall include a requirement to contribute a fair share to a Department and Fie and Entry dedicated fund to purchase fire fighting District Commercial apparatus to protect buildings more than 27 feet in height, if and when such a fund is created by the city of Cloverdale. The Development Agreement should address measures to recover the ongoing costs for additional fire personnel. Property tax revenues for the development in the City should remain equivalent to the property tax revenues the Fire District would share if the project remained in the County area. b) The Precise Development Plans for the b) Cloverdale a) Included in Precise residential, hotel/spa and commercial Community Development Plan components of the Project shall include a Development and for Resort Hotel requirement to pay a fair share of the Police Department and Entry capital costs of adding one sworn officer Commercial and one half-time community service officer to the Cloverdale Police Department. The Development Agreement to be negotiated between the developer and the City should address measures to recover on-going costs of providing one shown officer and one half-time community service officer for the Cloverdale Police Department c) Prior to the approval of each Precise c) Included in Precise a) Included in each Development Plan for the project, a Development Plan Precise Recycling Plan shall be prepared and for Resort Hotel and Development submitted to the City and the County Waste Management Agency that Entry Commercial Plans addresses recycling for all related demolition, construction, and operation of new uses. During construction, contractors responsible for demolition of existing structures and construction of Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 41 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification Responsibility Responsibility Schedule

new facilities shall be required to separate recyclable materials (i.e., wood, scrap metal, asphalt, concrete, cardboard) from the construction and demolition debris in such a way as to avoid the landfill disposal of these recyclable materials. The solid waste storage areas of the new facility shall ensure that adequate and conveniently located space is provided for the necessary recycled material storage containers to be used by the project (i.e., paper, cardboard, plastic, metal, glass) and the project shall require establishment and ongoing performance of a recycling program. The overall goal of the Recycling Plan shall be to recycle at least 50 percent of all waste materials generated during construction and during subsequent operation of the project.

Public Servcies and Utilities. Mitigation Measure Applicant Cloverdale Building Prior to issuance any 4.13-6. As a condition of project approval, the Department building permit for any applicant shall be required to pay school impact dwelling within the mitigation fees. project

Alexander Valley Resort/City of Cloverdale Page 42 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ATTACHMENT 2

CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 014-2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE ADOPTING A REVISED MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE ALEXANDER VALLEY RESORT PROJECT, LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 254 ACRES OF LAND LYING WEST OF ASTI ROAD, WEST OF THE RUSSIAN RIVER, SOUTH OF SANTANA DRIVE AND NORTH OF CLOVERDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (APNs 116-260-012, 116-310- 013 & -014, 117-050-007, -010, -011, 012, -015, -016, -017, -018 & -019)

WHEREAS, on June 10, 2009, the Cloverdale City Council approved Resolution Nos. 028-2009 and 029-2009, approving the Alexander Valley Resort Specific Plan, prezoning and certifying an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); and WHEREAS, following City Council certification of the EIR and approval of the MMRP, a number of minor inaccuracies were identified in the MMRP document; and WHEREAS, a revised MMRP dated January 2010 has been prepared that corrects identified inaccuracies. The revised document does not affect the environmental analysis contained in the Project EIR documents or any mitigation measure; and WHEREAS, the original MMRP approved by the Cloverdale City Council dated February 2009 is hereby repealed; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed revised MMRP and all evidence received at the public meeting. All of these documents and evidence are herein incorporated by reference into this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE DOES HEREBY APPROVE A REVISED MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) FOR THE ALEXANDER VALLEY RESORT PROJECT, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as set forth as Exhibit A is designed to ensure that during project construction, the City, affected landowners, their assigns and successors in interest and any other responsible parties comply with the mitigation measures. The MMRP identified, for each mitigation measure, the party responsible for implementation. 2. The Revised MMRP corrects minor inaccuracies contained in the original MMRP and does not change any of the environmental analysis contained in

Alexander Valley Resort 2/10/10 City Council Page 1 Revised MMRP Resolution earlier EIR documents for the AVR project or mitigation measures contained in earlier CEQA documents. Based on the findings set forth in this resolution and the evidence in the Staff Report, the City Council hereby certifies the FEIR, makes findings concerning alternatives, and approves the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Alexander Valley Resort Project. ************* Resolution No. 014-2010 was duly adopted on this the 10th day of February, 2010 by the following roll call vote: (-ayes, -noes) AYES in favor of: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Approved: Attested: ______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

Alexander Valley Resort 2/10/10 City Council Page 2 Revised MMRP Resolution City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 7 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Consent Calendar Paul W. Wade, City Engineer Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 012-2010 Appointing the Engineer of Work for the Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2010-11 Summary The Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District (“District”) was initially formed by the City in 1997 in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (“Landscaping and Lighting Act”)to pay for costs associated with maintaining landscaping and maintenance in the creek area associated with Jefferson Springs IV subdivision (Zone 1). Additional zones have been annexed into the District over time and there are currently a total of seven Zones in the District.

The Landscaping and Lighting Act requires that the City undertake certain proceedings for any fiscal year in which assessments are to be levied and collected. These proceedings are typically accomplished at three separate Council meetings with the following actions:

1) Adopt a resolution appointing the Engineer of Work and directing the preparation of the annual Engineer’s Report. 2) Approve the Preliminary Engineer’s Report, declare the City Council’s intent to levy assessments and set a date for a public hearing. 3) Conduct a public hearing, approve the Final Engineer’s Reportand authorize the levying and collection of assessments for the upcoming fiscal year.

The attached resolution begins the proceeding for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year. The Engineer’s Report will analyze the anticipated FY 2010-11 costs for each zone in the District and determine the corresponding assessment amounts. The City Council can make changes to the Engineer’s Report once it has been prepared and filed. There are no annexations to the District anticipated for FY 2010-11.

The City Council has appointed Coastland Civil Engineering, the City Engineer, as the Engineer of Work for these proceedings since 1997 and they have demonstrated the expertise necessary to perform the work.

Options 1. Adopt a resolution appointing Coastland Civil Engineering as Engineer of Work for the FY 2010-11 Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District work. 2. Direct staff to locate another consulting firm that has the appropriate experience in assessment district work. Budget/Financial Impact All costs associated with these annual proceedings and the annual operation, maintenance and administration of the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District are recovered from the annual assessments levied on the properties within the District. The FY 2009-10 Engineer’s Report included $7,500 for Assessment Engineering to cover the cost of preparing the annual report. It is anticipated that the FY 2010-11 Engineer’s Report will include a similar amount. Subcommittee Recommendation:

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) N/A Recommended Council Action Consider adopting a resolution appointing Coastland Civil Engineering as the Engineer of Work for the FY 2010-11 Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District and directing them to prepare and to file the Annual Engineer’s Report pursuant to Section 22622 of the Streets and Highways Code. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 012-2010 cc:

Pg 2 CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 012–2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE APPOINTING COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING AS THE ENGINEER OF WORK FOR THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND DIRECTING THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF THE ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 (PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972)

WHEREAS, the City Council ordered the formation of the Assessment District during September, 1997 in order to levy and collect assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 22622 of the Streets and Highways Code, the City Council must annually appoint the Engineer of Work and direct the preparation and filing of the annual Engineer’s Report in order to levy and collect assessments on any following fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, it is anticipated that there will be no annexations into the Assessment District in FY 2010-11; and

WHEREAS, Coastland Civil Engineering, as the City Engineer, has demonstrated the expertise necessary to prepare the annual Engineer’s Report;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Cloverdale does hereby appoint Coastland Civil Engineering as the Engineer of Work for the City of Cloverdale’s Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District and does hereby direct it to prepare and to file the Annual Engineer’s Report showing any changes, pursuant to Section 22622 of the Streets and Highways Code.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No. 012–2010 was duly introduced and duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale at its regular meeting held on this 10th day of February, 2010 by the following Roll Call vote:

AYES in favor of: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: APPROVED: ATTESTED:

______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

Pg 3

City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 9 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Public Hearing Nina D. Regor, City Manager Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 013-2010 Approving a Property Tax Exchange with the Cloverdale Fire Protection District to Provide for Long Term City Funding of the Fire District and Approving a Settlement Agreement to Resolve All Historic Funding Disputes between the Fire District and the City Summary The Cloverdale Fire Protection District was formed in 1994. In 1997, the City and the District approved a settlement agreement to end litigation filed by the District concerning disputes between the Fire District and the City about funding of the Fire District. The settlement agreement required the City to pay the District $67,500 per year for ten years. The agreement also called for the two agencies to negotiate in good faith on the issue of future payments by the City to the District when the settlement agreement expired in 2007. Over the past several years, the City’s contributions to the District have increased significantly. This is in addition to the $6.3 million contributed from the Redevelopment Agency for the new Fire Protection District Headquarters project. The City and the District have been working on two tracks –first, a short-term (two-year) approach for City funding for the Fire District, and second, developing a more permanent funding arrangement for future City funding for the Fire District. For the first track, the City and the District reached an agreement on the two-year funding contribution approach, effective July 1, 2008. The City provided a fixed $300,000 to the Fire District for FY 2008/09. The City and the District disagreed on the interpretation of the second year funding –the City having the position that the second year’s funding would be adjusted by the prior year’s percent change in property tax revenues, whether that percent change goes up or down. This would have led to an approximate contribution of $264,000 for FY 2009/10. The District expected that the contribution would be adjusted by the percent change, but would not go below the fixed amount of $300,000. The City budgeted $275,000 in the General Fund as its FY 2009/10 contribution to the Fire District. The approach for long term Fire District funding involved the City and the District agreeing to a Tax Rate Area (TRA) allocation shift of the AB 8/Proposition 13 taxes. The City’s factor would decrease by .04438 in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012, and 013; the Fire District’s factor would increase by the same amount. The Fire District agreed to the factor adjustment of .04438 in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012, and 013 effective July 1, 2010 (i.e., beginning FY 2010/11), if the City would pay the full $300,000 for FY 2009/10. The proposal would have no sunset clause and this would become the permanent property tax funding source for the District in the City tax rate areas. The Finance Subcommittee discussed this proposal at its September 25, 2009 meeting, and recommended approval. The Council agreed and gave its tentative approval and direction to staff at its October 14, 2009 meeting. A permanent funding agreement would put an end to years of discussion about how much the City can and should pay toward provision of services by a separate agency. The TRA factor adjustment would be authorized by tax exchange resolutions adopted by the City Council and the Fire District. In addition, a settlement agreement crafted by the City’s and the District’s attorneys would be executed to ensure that the tax allocation resolutions permanently resolve the historic disputes between the Fire District and the City concerning City funding of the Fire Protection District . The attached resolutions and settlement agreement have been provided to the Fire District for their review and action with respect to P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) the Fire Protection District resolution, and are now presented to the City Council for action. In accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02 and California Government Code Section 6061, the City gave published notice of a hearing to consider the effect of the proposed transfer of property tax proceeds on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues. The public hearing is scheduled for February 10, 2010. The Cloverdale Fire Protection District Board is scheduled to hold a public hearing and to consider a corresponding Resolution, including settlement agreement, at its meeting on February 8, 2010. City staff will provide an update on the District’s actions at the February 10, 2010 Council meeting. Options Adopt the resolution approving a property tax exchange with the Fire District and execution of a settlement agreement between the Fire District and the City, or provide additional direction to staff Budget/Financial Impact The FY 2009/10 contribution requires an additional $25,000 from the City General Fund. The TRA factor adjustment pursuant to the tax exchange resolution would result in lower property tax revenue receipts in the General Fund, but in lieu of any other requirement to fund the Fire District in the future. The amount of property tax revenue the City receives in the future following implementation of the property tax exchange would be based on the County’s calculation processin accordance with applicable law. The amount of property tax proceeds that would be transferred to the Fire District in 2010/2011 is unknown; however, if the arrangement had been in existence for FY 2010/2011, the exchange would have been approximately $264,000. Subcommittee Recommendation The Joint City/Fire District Subcommittee and the Council Finance Subcommittee have separately discussed the operational funding topic over several years. Both have recommended approval of this approach. Recommended Council Action 1. Adopt Resolution No. 013-2010 by title only, decreasing the City of Cloverdale’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 and increasing the Cloverdale Fire Protection District’s factor by .04438 in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012 and 013 effective July 1, 2010 and approving a settlement agreement between the Fire District and the City intended to permanently resolve historic funding disputes between the agencies and authorizing the City Manager to sign the settlement agreement on behalf of the City. Attachments: 1. June 1, 2009 Memo to Council: City-Fire District Tax Rate Area (TRA) Reallocation 2. Resolution No. 013-2010 approving a property tax exchange with the Cloverdale Fire Protection District decreasing the City’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 and increasing the District’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012, and 013, and authorizing execution of a settlement agreement and release of all claims to resolve any disputes concerning City funding of the Fire Protection District, including Exhibit A, a resolution of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District consenting to a property tax exchange with the City of Cloverdale and Exhibit B, a settlement agreement and release of all claims cc: Brian Elliot, Chief, Cloverdale Fire Protection District

1341318.5

MEMORANDUM

To: Mayor Joe Palla and Members of Council From: Nina D. Regor, City Manager Date: June 1, 2009 Subject: City‐Fire District Tax Rate Area (TRA) Re‐Allocation

The City of Cloverdale and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District agreed on a two‐year funding proposal pending discussions on a long‐term funding mechanism for the District. The purpose of this memo is to provide some background information and to summarize activities to date.

History

Voters in the City of Cloverdale approved forming the Cloverdale Fire Protection District in 1994. In 1997, the City and District both approved a settlement agreement. That agreement provided for annual payments of $67,500 per year for ten years. It also provided that subsequent to the expiration of the agreement, the two agencies would negotiate in good faith a renewal on terms and for a period agreed upon by both. In the negotiations, the parties were to, “…consider, among other things, all circumstances relevant to the needs of the District and the competing demands on City revenues…” Over the years, the City’s contributions to the Fire District have significantly increased, as shown in the table below. The increases began even before the expiration of the $67,500 annual funding obligation. The contributions for operations came from the City’s General Fund1; the contributions to fund the District’s new Fire Station came from the City’s Community Development Agency Fund. The CDA Fund’s revenue source is the tax increment from the Cloverdale Redevelopment Area.

Fiscal Year Amount Operations: FY 2001/02 $67,500 FY 2002/03 67,500 FY 2003/04 67,500 FY 2004/05 115,500 FY 2005/06 153,800 FY 2006/07 361,000 FY 2007/08 464,000 FY 2008/09 300,000 Capital: FY 2006/07 Fire Station $6,300,000 FY 2007/08 Fire Station Impact Fees 52,130

In the Spring of 2008, the City and the District agreed to a two‐year funding proposal pending negotiation of a longer‐term solution.

1 The $464,000 operations contribution in FY 2007/08 came from the City’s Community Development Agency Fund.

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451 City‐Fire District Tax Rate Re‐Allocation, continued June 1, 2009 Page 2 of 3

That solution, as described in City Memos dated March 19, 2008 and April 14, 2008, called for a flat contribution of $300,000 from the City to the District in FY 2008/09, a contribution in FY 2009/10 based upon the % change in Prop 13 collections of the prior year (FY 2008/09), and the District would receive all of the Fire impact fees collected by the City2. As stated in those memos, the City even then was facing a deficit in its General Fund. It was recognized that the short‐term solution was not one that the City could sustain in the long‐term. In September 2008, the District Board and the City Council invited members of the Sonoma County Auditor’s Office to explain California’s Property Tax system and how it played out at the local government level. This was done in anticipation of the two agencies discussing a permanent tax allocation shift. On January 27, 2009, the Fire/City Joint Subcommittee agreed to recommend to the Fire District Board and the City Council a joint resolution to forward to the County agreeing to the creation of a fire factor of .044383 applied against the Prop 13 collections in TRAs 000, 001, 007, 011, 012, and 013. The District began working with its attorney to draft a joint resolution, and the County agreed to create a spreadsheet showing how the Auditor’s Office would calculate the effects of the TRA re‐allocation. The City agreed to this approach because not only did it treat residents within Cloverdale in a manner consistent with the properties in unincorporated Sonoma County served by the District, it also treated all residents within Cloverdale in an equitable manner, regardless of what part of the City they lived in. It’s important to note that the one TRA within City limits that is currently different than the others is TRA 14. That TRA was created when it was annexed to the City. Because that annexation occurred subsequent to the District’s formation, the District has its own factor. That factor, at the District’s request, was set at .04438. The two main advantages to both the District and the City of this arrangement were that the District would finally have financial autonomy and both agencies would share in the good times (property tax increases) and bad times (property tax decreases). On May 11, 2009 the Fire/City Joint Subcommittee reviewed the spreadsheet created by the Sonoma County Auditor’s office. It resulted in an estimated $219,700 re‐allocation if the agreement had been in effect for FY 2008/09, and an estimated $219,200 if the agreement is in place for FY 2009/10. This amount was less than the District anticipated for two reasons. First, the State has set forth the methodology for calculating and distributing taxes to the various taxing agencies and the Fire District. That methodology differs, depending upon whether the taxing area is or is not part of a redevelopment area. Second, the community saw a decrease in real‐dollar valuation for its property tax assessments due to the economy. According to the Auditor’s Office, there is time to put this agreement into effect for FY 2009/10 if both agencies come to agreement in a timely way. On May 12, 2009, Fire Chief Brian Elliott forwarded a request that the City consider a different TRA factor: maintain the .04438 factor in the non‐RDA TRAs, and calculate a different factor for those TRAs within the redevelopment area. On May 21, 2009, the City Finance Subcommittee met to discuss the updated General Fund Five‐Year

2 Impact fees were originally to be retained by the Redevelopment Agency as a partial offset to the cost of the Fire Station. Under the amended agreement, the District was not required to repay any portion of the CDA funding for the Station. 3 The same factor charged to the property owners in the TRAs served by the District in unincorporated Sonoma County. City‐Fire District Tax Rate Re‐Allocation, continued June 1, 2009 Page 3 of 3

Forecast as well as the Fire District request.

Finance Subcommittee Review and Recommendation

The Subcommittee reviewed the May 12, 2009 request. Public Safety, both police and fire services, remain a high priority for the City. The City agreed to permanently divert a portion of its Prop 13 collections to the Fire District to sustain its operations. However, the City has also been consistent in stating that because of its ongoing deficit in the General Fund, it cannot afford to provide annual funding at the rate it has done for the past few years. In the January updated forecast, the City was facing an $800,000 deficit in the General Fund next year. While that deficit is currently fluctuating, the property tax estimates are likely to get worse rather than better, which means that the deficit is more likely to grow in the short‐term. This has a direct impact on police services, which are the main General Fund expense, in addition to other City services. The City negotiated with the Fire District in good faith the TRA re‐allocation that the Joint Subcommittee agreed to in January. That negotiation was intended to take into account both the needs of the District and the competing demands on City revenues. It was not necessarily intended to fully fund the Fire District through existing City resources. Through the negotiation process, the City representatives, both from the City/Fire Joint Subcommittee and from the City Finance Subcommittee, settled on a factor considered to be fair, even though that factor is significantly higher than the $67,500 annual obligation agreed to in 1997. They did so because of the continued commitment to public safety, including fire services, even though that commitment places an ongoing financial strain on the City’s resources. After reviewing the City’s financial condition, the Finance Subcommittee could not support a factor greater than .04438, nor can it support using different factors for different TRAs, because it would be an inherently inequitable approach. CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 013-2010

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE APPROVING A PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE WITH THE CLOVERDALE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT REDUCING THE CITY’S PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION RATE BY .04438 AND INCREASING THE DISTRICT’S PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION RATE BY .04438 IN TAX RATE AREAS 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, AND 001-013 PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 99.02 AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS TO FULLY AND FINALLY RESOLVE ANY DISPUTES BETWEEN THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND THE CITY CONCERNING CITY FUNDING OF THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

WHEREAS, in 1993, the Cloverdale City Council determined that it would be in the City's best interest to create a fire protection district due to Sonoma County's proposed funding cuts under the contract for fire protection services between the City and the County; and

WHEREAS, it was intended that revenue for the new fire protection district would come from two sources: property taxes and fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 27-93, adopted June 28, 1993, the City Council requested that the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”)initiate proceedings for the formation of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District (“Fire Protection District” or “District”), to be financed through existing property taxes and proposed fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, on October 6, 1993, the Sonoma County LAFCO issued a Certificate of Filing Application accepting the Cloverdale application for a reorganization involving the formation of the Fire Protection District, establishing the District's sphere of influence and detaching the area from County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services); and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 2171, adopted October 7, 1993, and Resolution No. 2179, adopted December 3, 1993, Sonoma County LAFCO approved the proposed reorganization of the territory encompassing the Cloverdale service area and formation of the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, LAFCO Resolution Nos. 2171 and 2179 established the Fire Protection District's sphere of influence, provided that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FA-Cloverdale, and the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization would be continued by the Fire Protection District, and provided that the County would transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection services in those areas to the District; and

1 WHEREAS, on December 14, 1993, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 93-1867 ordering the reorganization to form the Fire Protection District, detaching territory from County Service Area 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, and establishing the Fire Protection District sphere of influence and calling an election on the question for April 12, 1994; and

WHEREAS, on April 12, 1994, "Measure C" was passed by the voters, forming the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on May 24, 1994 the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors passed Resolution No. 94-0750 confirming the order of reorganization and ordering the formation of the Fire Protection District, detachment of the territory from Fire Service Area 40 and establishment of the District's sphere of influence; and

WHEREAS, the Statement of Boundary Change dated June 6, 1994, provides that the territory will be taxed for existing bonded indebtedness or contractual obligations, and that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, or the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization will be continued by the Fire Protection District and that the County will transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection within the reorganized territory to the District; and

WHEREAS, on August 9, 1994 the Fire Protection District adopted Resolution No. FD7-94 authorizing and imposing fire suppression services assessments (“Fire Services Assessments”) to fund fire suppression services, equipment, and personnel; and

WHEREAS, on August 31, 1994, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services for July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995; and

WHEREAS, on July 26, 1995, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for the contribution of property tax revenue collected within the City of Cloverdale in which the City agreed to contribute approximately $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for two fiscal years commencing July 1, 1994, and ending June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services on September 25, 1995, with a term of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on July 3, 1996, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement to transfer facilities, equipment and employees from the City to the District, with the District providing fire protection services directly as of July 1, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on September 30, 1996, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement regarding funding of the District in which the City agreed to pay $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for fiscal year 1996-1997; and

WHEREAS, April 7, 1997, the Fire Protection District filed a Writ Petition and Complaint with the Sonoma County Superior Court against the City asserting that the City was obligated to transfer a portion of the City’s property tax revenues to the District; and

2 WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into a Settlement Agreement and General Release on August 28, 1997, in which the City agreed to pay the District $67,500 annually for ten years commencing July 1, 1997 and ending June 30, 2007, and the District agreed to dismiss the Writ Petition and Complaint. The Settlement Agreement required the parties to negotiate a renewal of the Settlement Agreement that considered the needs of the Fire Protection District and the competing fiscal demands on the City upon the expiration of the Settlement Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement and General Release expired effective June 30, 2007, and the parties have been negotiating in good faith to reach a long term funding solution for the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007, the City and the Cloverdale Community Development Agency (“Agency”) consented to payment of up to $6.3 million for land acquisition and construction costs for a new Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective October 16, 2007, the Agency and the Fire Protection District entered into a sharing of powers agreement setting forth the respective rights and obligations of the Agency and the District regarding construction and financing of the Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective June 25, 2008 the City and the Fire Protection District entered Amendment 1 to the sharing of powers agreement limiting the maximum amount of the Agency’scontribution to the District headquarters to $6,352,744, providing for retention of the facilities portion of Fire Protection District Impact Fees by the District to help fund its share of project costs until the Headquarters project is fully funded, and subsequent assignment of such fees to the Agency, to partly reimburse the Agency, and payment by the Fire Protection District of additional construction costs once the original project cost is increased by at least $210,035; and

WHEREAS, in April of 2008, the City proposed a two-year operational funding approach, and Fire Protection District agreed in concept, that the City would contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2008/2009, with the amount of the contribution adjusted in future years based on Proposition 13 property tax receipts; and

WHEREAS, the City contributed $300,000 to the District in fiscal year 2008/2009 for operational expenses; and

WHEREAS, the City has agreed to contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2009/2010; and

WHEREAS, in order to provide a long term City funding source for the Fire Protection District, in addition to the Fire Services Assessments, and such other assessments or levies as the District may deem necessary in the future to ensure sufficient funding to provide fire services to the area served by the District, including the City, to comply with the intent of Measure C, which the voters approved in 1994 creating the District, to satisfy the terms of the Settlement Agreement and General Release dated August 28, 1997, and to finally and permanently resolve any questions or disputes concerning any obligation of the City to provide funding for the

3 District, the City and the District have agreed on an equitable formula for a property tax exchange between the City and the District involving the City’s AB8/Proposition 13 property tax revenues to provide ongoing City funding fire protection services within the City; and

WHEREAS, the District includes all of the territory within the limits of the City of Cloverdale and certain unincorporated territory adjacent to the City of Cloverdale; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of state law, the County Auditor-Controller has established tax rate areas throughout the County, which are specific geographic areas that contain the same combination of local agencies and school entities during a particular fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, within each tax rate area, the County Auditor-Controller has set forth the property tax allocation factor for each taxing entity, and, subject to certain other statutory requirements, the County Auditor-Controller distributes the property tax revenue generated in each tax rate area to the local agencies in proportion to their respective property tax allocation factor; and

WHEREAS, the territory of the City contains seven tax rate areas (TRA 001-000, TRA 001-001, TRA 001-007, TRA 001-011, TRA 001-012, TRA 001-013, and TRA 001-014), and the District has jurisdiction in each of these tax rate areas; and

WHEREAS, the District has requested that, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, the City and the Fire Protection District approve a property tax exchange decreasing the City’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by .04438 and increasing the District’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 in tax rate areas 001-000, 001- 001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013, which would result in the District having a property tax allocation factor of 0.04438 in each of the seven tax rate areas in the City, because the District already has a property tax allocation factor of .04438 in tax rate area 001-014; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02 and California Government Code Section 6061, the City gave published notice of a hearing to consider the effect of the proposed transfer of property tax proceeds on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, on February 10, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the effect of the proposed transfer of property tax proceeds on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, the City, having found as follows, in accordance with subdivision (f) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, is agreeable to the District’s request:

A. The City has sufficient revenues available for the purpose of facilitating the proposed exchange or transfer, in that the transfer would occur each fiscal year from current fiscal year Proposition 13 tax receipts ;

B. The transfer will not result in any increase in the ratio between the amount of revenues of the City that are generated by regulatory licenses, use charges, user fees, or

4 assessments and used to finance services provided by the City, in that such fees are calculated based on the cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, and without regard to other sources of City revenue;

C. The transfer will not impair the City’s ability to provide existing services, in that each year the City balances the cost of providing existing services with available revenues, and makes adjustments as necessary;

D. The transfer will not result in a reduction in property tax revenues to school districts, in that the proposed tax exchange does not involve or affect property tax revenue of the Cloverdale Unified School District, or any other school district; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02 and California Government Code Section 6061, the Fire Protection District, as a local agency affected by the proposed property tax transfer, gave published notice of a hearing to consider the effect of the proposed property tax exchange on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, on February 8, 2010, the Fire Protection District conducted a public hearing to consider the effect of the proposed property tax exchange on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Protection District is agreeable to the proposed property tax exchange, and adopted a resolution attached to and made a part of this resolution as Exhibit A confirming the Fire Protection District’s assent to the property tax exchange; and

WHEREAS, an authorized representative of the Fire Protection District has executed on behalf of the District a settlement agreement and release of all claims, which is attached to and made a part of this resolution as Exhibit B and which is intended to fully and finally resolve any disputes between the Fire Protection District and the City concerning City funding of the Fire Protection District;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale as follows:

1. The above recitals are declared to be true and correct and are incorporated herein as findings of the City Council.

2. Effective with the 2010-2011 fiscal year, the City of Cloverdale hereby determines to exchange or transfer property tax, pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, such that the City’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor in tax rate areas 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013 is reduced by 0.04438, and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District’sproperty tax allocation factor is increased by 0.04438 in tax rate areas 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013.

5 3. To the extent required by subdivision (c) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, the City Council hereby indicates its concurrence with the proposed exchange and directs the City Clerk to notify the County Auditor of the exchange approved by this resolution.

4. The City Council hereby requests that the County Auditor-Controller, pursuant to subdivision (a) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, adjust the property tax allocation factors for the City of Cloverdale and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District as specified in this resolution.

5. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the City the settlement agreement and release of all claims attached to and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit B.

6. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

7. Each portion of this resolution is severable. Should any portion of this resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable by a body of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining resolution portions shall be and continue in full force and effect, except as to those resolution portions that have been adjudged invalid. The City Council of the City of Cloverdale hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution and each section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase and other portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase or other portion may be held invalid or unconstitutional.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No. 013-2010 was duly introduced and legally adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale at its regular meeting held on the 10th day of February 2010 by the following roll call vote: (XX-ayes, XX-noes)

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTESTED:

______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

1341339.5

6 Exhibit A to City of Cloverdale Resolution No. 013-2010

CLOVERDALE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

RESOLUTION NO. ____

RESOLUTION OF THE CLOVERDALE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD CONSENTING TO A PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE WITH THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE REDUCING THE CITY’S PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION RATE BY .04438 AND INCREASING THE CLOVERDALE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT’S PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION RATE BY .04438 IN TAX RATE AREAS 001-000, 001- 001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, AND 001-013 PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 99.02 AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS TO FULLY AND FINALLY RESOLVE ANY DISPUTES BETWEEN THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND THE CITY CONCERNING CITY FUNDING OF THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

WHEREAS, in 1993, the Cloverdale City Council determined that it would be in the City's best interest to create a fire protection district due to Sonoma County's proposed funding cuts under the contract for fire protection services between the City and the County; and

WHEREAS, it was intended that revenue for the new fire protection district would come from two sources: property taxes and fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 27-93, adopted June 28, 1993, the City Council requested that the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”)initiate proceedings for the formation of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District (“Fire Protection District” or “District”), to be financed through existing property taxes and proposed fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, on October 6, 1993, the Sonoma County LAFCO issued a Certificate of Filing Application accepting the Cloverdale application for a reorganization involving the formation of the Fire Protection District, establishing the District's sphere of influence and detaching the area from County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services); and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 2171, adopted October 7, 1993, and Resolution No. 2179, adopted December 3, 1993, Sonoma County LAFCO approved the proposed reorganization of the territory encompassing the Cloverdale service area and formation of the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, LAFCO Resolution Nos. 2171 and 2179 established the Fire Protection District's sphere of influence, provided that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FA-Cloverdale, and the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization would be continued by the Fire Protection District, and provided that the County would transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection services in those areas to the District; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 1993, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 93-1867 ordering the reorganization to form the Fire Protection District, detaching territory from County Service Area 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, and establishing the Fire Protection District sphere of influence and calling an election on the question for April 12, 1994; and

WHEREAS, on April 12, 1994, "Measure C" was passed by the voters, forming the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on May 24, 1994 the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors passed Resolution No. 94-0750 confirming the order of reorganization and ordering the formation of the Fire Protection District, detachment of the territory from Fire Service Area 40 and establishment of the District's sphere of influence; and

WHEREAS, the Statement of Boundary Change dated June 6, 1994, provides that the territory will be taxed for existing bonded indebtedness or contractual obligations, and that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, or the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization will be continued by the Fire Protection District and that the County will transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection within the reorganized territory to the District; and

WHEREAS, on August 9, 1994 the Fire Protection District adopted Resolution No. FD7-94 authorizing and imposing fire suppression services assessments (“Fire Services Assessments”) to fund fire suppression services, equipment, and personnel; and

WHEREAS, on August 31, 1994, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services for July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995; and

WHEREAS, on July 26, 1995, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for the contribution of property tax revenue collected within the City of Cloverdale in which the City agreed to contribute approximately $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for two fiscal years commencing July 1, 1994, and ending June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services on September 25, 1995, with a term of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on July 3, 1996, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement to transfer facilities, equipment and employees from the City to the District, with the District providing fire protection services directly as of July 1, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on September 30, 1996, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement regarding funding of the District in which the City agreed to pay $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for fiscal year 1996-1997; and

WHEREAS, April 7, 1997, the Fire Protection District filed a Writ Petition and Complaint with the Sonoma County Superior Court against the City asserting that the City was obligated to transfer a portion of the City’s property tax revenues to the District; and

2 WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into a Settlement Agreement and General Release on August 28, 1997, in which the City agreed to pay the District $67,500 annually for ten years commencing July 1, 1997 and ending June 30, 2007, and the District agreed to dismiss the Writ Petition and Complaint. The Settlement Agreement required the parties to negotiate a renewal of the Settlement Agreement that considered the needs of the Fire Protection District and the competing fiscal demands on the City upon the expiration of the Settlement Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement and General Release expired effective June 30, 2007, and the parties have been negotiating in good faith to reach a long term funding solution for the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007, the City and the Cloverdale Community Development Agency (“Agency”) consented to payment of up to $6 million for land acquisition and construction costs for a new Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective October 16, 2007, the Agency and the Fire Protection District entered into a sharing of powers agreement setting forth the respective rights and obligations of the Agency and the District regarding construction and financing of the Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective June 25, 2008, the City and the Fire Protection District entered Amendment 1 to the sharing of powers agreement limiting the maximum amount of the Agency’scontribution to the District headquarters to $6,352,744, providing for retention of the facilities portion of Fire Protection District Impact Fees by the District to help fund its share of project costs until the Headquarters project is fully funded, and subsequent assignment of such fees to the Agency, to partly reimburse the Agency, and payment by the Fire Protection District of additional construction costs once the original project cost is increased by at least $210,035; and

WHEREAS, in April of 2008, the City proposed a two-year operational funding approach, and Fire Protection District agreed in concept, that the City would contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2008/2009, with the amount of the contribution adjusted in future years based on Proposition 13 property tax receipts; and

WHEREAS, the City contributed $300,000 to the District in fiscal year 2008/2009 for operational expenses; and

WHEREAS, the City has agreed to contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2009/2010; and

WHEREAS, in order to provide a long term City funding source for the Fire Protection District, in addition to the Fire Services Assessments, and such other assessments or levies as the District may deem necessary in the future to ensure sufficient funding to provide fire services to the area served by the District, including the City, to comply with the intent of Measure C, which the voters approved in 1994 creating the District, to satisfy the terms of the Settlement Agreement and General Release dated August 28, 1997, and to finally and permanently resolve any questions or disputes concerning any obligation of the City to provide funding for the

3 District, the City and the District have agreed on an equitable formula for a property tax exchange between the City and the District involving the City’s AB8/Proposition 13 property tax revenues to provide ongoing City funding for fire protection services within the City; and

WHEREAS, the District includes all of the territory within the City limits of the City of Cloverdale and certain unincorporated territory adjacent to the City of Cloverdale; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of state law, the County Auditor-Controller has established tax rate areas throughout the County, which are specific geographic areas that contain the same combination of local agencies and school entities during a particular fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, within each tax rate area, the County Auditor-Controller has set forth the property tax allocation factor for each taxing entity, and, subject to certain other statutory requirements, the County Auditor-Controller distributes the property tax revenue generated in each tax rate area to the local agencies in proportion to their respective property tax allocation factor; and

WHEREAS, the territory of the City contains seven tax rate areas (TRA 001-000, TRA 001-001, TRA 001-007, TRA 001-011, TRA 001-012, TRA 001-013, and TRA 001-014), and the District has jurisdiction in each of these tax rate areas; and

WHEREAS, the District has requested that, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, the City and the Fire Protection District approve a property tax exchange decreasing the City’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by .04438 and increasing the District’s property tax allocation factor by .04438 in tax rate areas 001-000, 001- 001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013, which would result in the District having a property tax allocation factor of 0.04438 in each of the seven tax rate areas in the City, because the District already has a property tax allocation factor of .04438 in tax rate area 011-014; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02 and California Government Code Section 6061, the City gave published notice of a hearing to consider the effect of the proposed transfer of property tax proceeds on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, on February 10, 2010, the City Council will conduct a public hearing to consider the effect of the proposed transfer of property tax proceeds on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, the City Council must find as follows, in accordance with subdivision (f) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, to exchange property tax with the District in accordance with the District’s request:

A. The City has sufficient revenues available for the purpose of facilitating the proposed exchange or transfer, in that the transfer would occur each fiscal year from current fiscal year Proposition 13 tax receipts;

B. The transfer will not result in any increase in the ratio between the amount of revenues of the City that are generated by regulatory licenses, use charges, user fees, or

4 assessments and used to finance services provided by the City, in that such fees are calculated based on the cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, and without regard to other sources of City revenue;

C. The transfer will not impair the City’s ability to provide existing services, in that each year the City balances the cost of providing existing services with available revenues, and makes adjustments as necessary;

D. The transfer will not result in a reduction in property tax revenues to school districts, in that the proposed tax exchange does not involve or affect property tax revenue of the Cloverdale Unified School District, or any other school district; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02 and California Government Code Section 6061, the Fire Protection District, as a local agency affected by the proposed property tax transfer, gave published notice of a hearing to consider the effect of the proposed property tax exchange on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with subdivision (e) of California Revenue and taxation Code Section 99.02, on February 8, 2010, the Fire Protection District conducted a public hearing to consider the effect of the proposed property tax exchange on fees, charges, assessments, taxes and other revenues; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Protection District assents to the proposed property tax exchange; and

WHEREAS, attached to and made a part of this resolution as Exhibit A is a settlement agreement and release of all claims, which is intended to fully and finally resolve any disputes between the Fire Protection District and the City concerning City funding of the Fire Protection District;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District as follows:

1. The above recitals are declared to be true and correct and are incorporated herein as findings of the Board.

2. Effective with the 20010-2011 fiscal year, the Cloverdale Fire Protection District Board hereby assents to exchange or transfer property tax, pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, such that the City of Cloverdale’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor in tax rate areas 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001- 011, 001-012, and 001-013 is reduced by 0.04438, and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District’s property tax allocation factor is increased by 0.04438 in tax rate areas 001-000, 001-001, 001- 007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013.

3. To the extent required by subdivision (c) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, the Cloverdale Fire Protection District Board hereby indicates its

5 concurrence with the proposed exchange and directs the District Clerk to notify the County Auditor of the exchange approved by this resolution.

4. The Cloverdale Fire Protection District Board hereby requests that the County Auditor-Controller, pursuant to subdivision (a) of section 99.02 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, and Resolution no. ______adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale, and this resolution, adjust the property tax allocation factors for the City of Cloverdale and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District as specified in City of Cloverdale Resolution no. _____ and this resolution.

5. The Board Chair is authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District the settlement agreement and release of all claims attached to and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit A.

6. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

7. Each portion of this resolution is severable. Should any portion of this resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable by a body of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining resolution portions shall be and continue in full force and effect, except as to those resolution portions that have been adjudged invalid. The Board of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution and each section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase and other portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase or other portion may be held invalid or unconstitutional.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No ______-2010 was duly introduced and legally adopted by the Board of the Cloverdale Fire Protection District at its regular meeting held on the _____ day of ______2010 by the following roll call vote: ( - )

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTESTED:

______, Chair ______, Clerk

1341503.5

6 Exhibit B to City of Cloverdale Resolution No. 013-2010

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS

This Settlement Agreement and General Release of All Claims (the "Agreement") is made as of the ______day of ______, 2010, by and between the City of Cloverdale, a California municipal corporation ("City") and the Cloverdale Fire Protection District, a fire protection district organized under the laws of the State of California (“Fire Protection District” or "District"), with reference to the following facts and purposes:

RECITALS

WHEREAS, in 1993, the Cloverdale City Council determined that it would be in the City's best interest to create a fire protection district due to Sonoma County's proposed funding cuts under the contract for fire protection services between the City and the County; and

WHEREAS, it was intended that revenue for the new fire protection district would come from two sources: property taxes and fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 27-93, adopted June 28, 1993, the City Council requested that the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) initiate proceedings for the formation of the Fire Protection District, to be financed through existing property taxes and proposed fire protection assessments; and

WHEREAS, on October 6, 1993, the Sonoma County LAFCO issued a Certificate of Filing Application accepting the Cloverdale application for a reorganization involving the formation of the Fire Protection District, establishing the District's sphere of influence and detaching the area from County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services); and

WHEREAS, via Resolution No. 2171, adopted October 7, 1993, and Resolution No. 2179, adopted December 3, 1993, Sonoma County LAFCO approved the proposed reorganization of the territory encompassing the Cloverdale service area and formation of the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, LAFCO Resolution Nos. 2171 and 2179 established the Fire Protection District's sphere of influence, provided that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FA-Cloverdale, and the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization would be continued by the Fire Protection District, and provided that the County would transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection services in those areas to the District; and

WHEREAS, on December 14, 1993, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 93-1867 ordering the reorganization to form the Fire Protection District, detaching territory from County Service Area 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, and establishing the Fire Protection District sphere of influence and calling an election on the question for April 12, 1994; and WHEREAS, on April 12, 1994, "Measure C" was passed by the voters, forming the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on May 24, 1994 the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors passed Resolution No. 94-0750 confirming the order of reorganization and ordering the formation of the Fire Protection District, detachment of the territory from Fire Service Area 40 and establishment of the District's sphere of influence; and

WHEREAS, the Statement of Boundary Change dated June 6, 1994, provides that the territory will be taxed for existing bonded indebtedness or contractual obligations, and that any fire suppression assessments authorized by County Service Area No. 40 (Fire Services), Zone FS-Cloverdale, or the City prior to the effective date of the reorganization will be continued by the Fire Protection District and that the County will transfer its share of property taxes allocated for fire protection within the reorganized territory to the District; and

WHEREAS, on August 9, 1994, the Fire Protection District adopted Resolution No. FD7-94 authorizing and imposing fire suppression services assessments (“Fire Services Assessments”) to fund fire suppression services, equipment, and personnel; and

WHEREAS, on August 31, 1994, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services for July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995; and

WHEREAS, on July 26, 1995, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for the contribution of property tax revenue collected within the City of Cloverdale in which the City agreed to contribute approximately $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for two fiscal years commencing July 1, 1994, and ending June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement for fire protection services on September 25, 1995, with a term of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on July 3, 1996, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into an agreement to transfer facilities, equipment and employees from the City to the District, with the District providing fire protection services directly as of July 1, 1996; and

WHEREAS, on September 30, 1996, the City and Fire Protection District entered into an agreement regarding funding of the District in which the City agreed to pay $67,500 of its property tax revenues to the District for fiscal year 1996-1997; and

WHEREAS, April 7, 1997, the Fire Protection District filed a Writ Petition and Complaint with the Sonoma County Superior Court against the City asserting that the City was obligated to transfer a portion of the City’s property tax revenues to the District; and

WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District entered into a Settlement Agreement and General Release on August 28, 1997, in which the City agreed to pay the District $67,500 annually for ten years commencing July 1, 1997 and ending June 30, 2007, and the District agreed to dismiss the Writ Petition and Complaint. The Settlement Agreement required the parties to negotiate a renewal of the Settlement Agreement that considered the needs of the

2 Fire Protection District and the competing fiscal demands on the City upon the expiration of the Settlement Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement and General Release expired effective June 30, 2007, and the parties have been negotiating in good faith to reach a long term funding solution for the Fire Protection District; and

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007, the City and the Cloverdale Community Development Agency (“Agency”) consented to payment of up to $6 million for land acquisition and construction costs for a new Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective October 16, 2007, the Agency and the Fire Protection District entered into a sharing of powers agreement (“Sharing of Powers Agreement”) setting forth the respective rights and obligations of the Agency and the District regarding construction and financing of the Fire Protection District headquarters; and

WHEREAS, effective June 25, 2008, the City and the Fire Protection District entered Amendment 1 to the Sharing of Powers Agreement limiting the maximum amount of the Agency’s contribution to the District headquarters to $6,352,744, providing for retention of the facilities portion of Fire Protection District Impact Fees by the District to help fund its share of project costs until the Headquarters project is fully funded, and subsequent assignment of such fees to the Agency, to partly reimburse the Agency, and payment by the Fire Protection District of additional construction costs once the original project cost is increased by at least $210,035; and

WHEREAS, in April of 2008, the City proposed a two-year operational funding approach, and Fire Protection District agreed in concept, that the City would contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2008/2009, with the amount of the contribution adjusted in future years based on Proposition 13 property tax receipts; and

WHEREAS, the City contributed $300,000 to the District in fiscal year 2008/2009 for operational expenses; and

WHEREAS, the City has agreed to contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2009/2010; and

WHEREAS, in order to provide a long term funding source for the Fire Protection District, in addition to the Fire Services Assessments and such other assessments or levies as the District may deem necessary in the future to ensure sufficient funding to provide fire services to the area served by the District, including the City, to comply with the intent of Measure C, which the voters approved in 1994 creating the District, to satisfy the terms of the Settlement Agreement and General Release dated August 28, 1997, and to finally and permanently resolve any questions or disputes concerning any obligation of the City to provide funding for the District, the City and the District have agreed on an equitable formula for a property tax exchange between the City and the District involving the City’s AB8/Proposition 13 property tax revenues to provide ongoing City funding for fire protection services within the City; and

3 WHEREAS, the District includes all of the territory within the City limits of the City of Cloverdale and certain unincorporated territory adjacent to the City of Cloverdale; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of state law, the County Auditor-Controller has established tax rate areas throughout the County, which are specific geographic areas that contain the same combination of local agencies and school entities during a particular fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, within each tax rate area, the County Auditor-Controller has set forth the property tax allocation factor for each taxing entity, and, subject to certain other statutory requirements, the County Auditor-Controller distributes the property tax revenue generated in each tax rate area to the local agencies in proportion to their respective property tax allocation factor; and

WHEREAS, the territory of the City contains seven tax rate areas (TRA 001-000, TRA 001-001, TRA 001-007, TRA 001-011, TRA 001-012, TRA 001-013, and TRA 001-014), and the District has jurisdiction in each of these tax rate areas; and

WHEREAS, the District has requested that, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02, the City and the Fire Protection District approve a property tax exchange decreasing the City’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by 0.04438 and increasing the District’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by 0.04438 in tax rate areas 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013, which would result in the District having a property tax allocation factor of 0.04438 in each of the seven tax rate areas in the City, because the District already has a property tax allocation factor of 0.04438 in tax rate area 001-014; and

WHEREAS, the City and the Fire Protection District have negotiated this Settlement Agreement and General Release of All Claims to fully and finally resolve all disputes between the City and the District concerning funding of the District by the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Property Tax Contribution by the City.

a. The City and the District, in settlement of any and all claims related to the City's funding of the District, agree that: a) the City shall contribute $300,000 to the District for fiscal year 2009/2010; b) the City will request that the Sonoma County Auditor-Controller decrease the City’sAB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by 0.04438 and increase the District’s AB 8/Proposition 13 property tax allocation factor by 0.04438 in Tax Rate Areas 001-000, 001-001, 001-007, 001-011, 001-012, and 001-013 effective July 1, 2010 in accordance with California Revenue and Taxation Code section 99.02; and c) the City and the District will reasonably cooperate in the fulfillment of all conditions imposed by the County that are reasonably necessary to accomplish such property tax allocation exchange or transfer.

4 b. The District agrees that the foregoing constitutes just compensation and full satisfaction for each and every claim, cause of action, liability, or demand, known or unknown, now or in the future, against the City, its officials, officers, employees, or agents, which is asserted or might have been asserted by the District, arising from or otherwise relating to the City's funding of the District.

2. Mutual Release of Claims. In full and final settlement concerning the funding of the District and the matters described in the Recitals above, and on the terms and conditions provided for in this Agreement, the District and the City agree to release and forever discharge each other and their respective shareholders, officials, officers, directors, employees, agents, contractors, attorneys, volunteers, legal successors-in-interest and assigns of any and all claims, actions, causes of action, obligations, liabilities, indebtedness, breach of duty, claims for injunctive relief and other equitable relief, suits, liens, losses, costs or expenses, now or in the future, known or unknown, fixed or contingent, liquidated or unliquidated, suspected or unsuspected, foreseen or unforeseen, that arise out of, are based upon, or relate in any way to the funding of the District by the City and/or the matters described in the Recitals above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this release does not apply to the obligations of the parties under the Sharing of Powers Agreement, or under this Agreement, which obligations shall continue until fully performed.

3. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542. The foregoing release is intended to extend to all such claims, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, and each party expressly waives and relinquishes any rights and benefits which they have or may have under Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California, which provides:

A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.

4. Consultation with Counsel. Each party acknowledges that they have each specifically reviewed with their attorney the meaning and effect of the release set forth in paragraph 2, the language from Civil Code Section 1542 quoted in paragraph 3, and the waiver contained in paragraph 3, their attorneys have fully explained the impact of these provisions, and they knowingly accept the risks associated with these provisions.

5. Execution Not an Admission. This Agreement is strictly for the purposes of compromising a dispute. By entering into this Agreement, neither party hereto admits that the claims or contentions of the other were or are valid or meritorious. Each party hereto has in the past denied and continues to deny the claims, assertions, allegations and contentions of the other.

6. Integration. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the City and the District, their predecessors, successors, and assigns pertaining to the subject matter herein and supersedes and replaces any and all other prior agreements, understandings and

5 communications between the parties. No change in, modification of, or amendment to this Agreement shall be valid unless set forth in writing and signed by all of the parties.

7. Additional Documents and Instruments. Each party agrees that it shall, upon the request of the other, execute and deliver such further documents and do such other acts and things as are reasonably necessary and appropriate to effectuate the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

8. Validity. Should any term, clause, or provision of this Agreement be found to be invalid, the validity of the remaining terms, clauses, and provisions shall not be affected.

9. Binding on Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

10. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which after each party has signed and delivered at least one such counterpart to each other party, shall have the same force and effect as an original executed by all parties.

11. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. In any proceeding to enforce any of the provisions or rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Settlement Agreement and General Release of All Claims.

Date: ______CITY OF CLOVERDALE

By: ______Nina D. Regor, City Manager

Approved as to form:

______Eric W. Danly, City Attorney

Date: ______CLOVERDALE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

By: ______Brian Elliott, Fire Chief

6 Approved as to form:

______Lawrence McLaughlin, District Counsel

1341501.5

7 City Council Agenda Item: 10 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact New Business Karen Shimizu, Housing and Redevelopment Project Manager Agenda Item Title Resolution No. 010-2010 approving an agreement with the Voigt Family Sculpture Agreement authorizing the placement and display of VFSF-owned artwork on City-owned property Summary The purpose of this agenda item is to approve an agreement with the Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation for placement of artwork on City-owned property. Project Summary: To enhance the City Gateway where Citrus Fair Drive meets Cloverdale Boulevard, a landscape improvement plan has been developed that will improve the front of the Thyme Square Property. The conceptual landscape plan is attached. The plan will be installed in phases, starting with the corner of Cloverdale Boulevard and Citrus Fair Drive. The plan includes two areas set aside for public art, city informational signage, and shade trees that will be placed in planter boxes with bench seating. The landscaping for the project will serve as a demonstration water conservation garden. As part of the project, various different community groups are participating in the project. The Cloverdale High School wood shop and art students will be constructing and painting the informational signs. The trees for the project were purchased from Sonoma County Jail Industries at a reduced rate and the planter boxes were constructed with material the city already had available. The trees will be relocated on the existing site or within City parks when the site is redeveloped. The City has started work on the project but it has been temporarily delayed due to weather conditions. A dedication ceremony will be planned and coordinated upon completion of the project. Public Art Agreement: The Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation (VFSF) has entered into an agreement with Boback Emad (“Artist”), owner and creator of an artwork entitled ”Shadows of Eternity.” VFSF has offered to loan the sculpture to the City for an original period of five years, to display in a public setting. The term of the agreement will be revisited when the Thyme Square Site is redeveloped. The proposed location for the sculpture is identified in the attached Landscape Plan for Thyme Square Plaza; however, the location may be revised if site conditions warrant changes. Options

Budget/Financial Impact In the 2009-2010 CDA Budget, $20,000 has been allocated for the site improvement project. Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action Move to approve by title only Resolution No. 010-2010 an agreement with the Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation (VFSF) authorizing the placement and display of VFSF-owned artwork entitled, “Shadows of Eternity” on City-owned property and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement Attachments: P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451

(Rev. 01/09) 1. City of Cloverdale Resolution No. 010-2010 2. Thyme Square Illustrative Landscape Site Plan cc:

Pg 2 CITY OF CLOVERDALE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 010-2010

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE VOIGT FAMILY SCULPTURE FOUNDATION (VFSF), AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT AND DISPLAY OF ARTWORK ENTITLED “SHADOWS OF ETERNITY” ON CITY- OWNED PROPERTY WHEREAS, VFSF has entered an agreement with Boback Emad (“Artist”), owner and creator of an artwork entitled “Shadows of Eternity” (“Artwork”) pursuant to which agreement VFSF is authorized to enter into this Agreement providing for cooperation of the Parties concerning the placement and display of the Artwork at the Display Location specified in this Agreement. The Artwork is further described in Exhibit A, which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the City has a landscape improvement plan for Thyme Square, which includes areas set aside for public art; and

WHEREAS, VFSF has offered the Artwork for inclusion in the Thyme Square landscape improvement plan; and

WHEREAS, the Artwork will be displayed in Thyme Square Plaza on Cloverdale Boulevard (“Display Location”), subject to the terms of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Display Location is public fee property owned by the City, and the Display Location is further described in Exhibit B, which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, VFSF and the City desire to establish the terms and conditions governing transportation, installation, display, maintenance, removal, return shipment, liability, and insurance concerning the Artwork.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE AS FOLLOWS:

The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a public art agreement, in substantially the same form as the attached agreement, with the Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation to place and display the artwork entitled, “Shadows of Eternity” by Boback Emad on City-owned property.

It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No. 010-2010 was duly introduced and legally adopted by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale at its meeting held on this 10th day

Pg 3 of February, 20010, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:

Approved Attested

______Carol Russell, Mayor Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

Pg 4 CITY OF CLOVERDALE PUBLIC ART AGREEMENT

This Agreement (“Agreement”) is executed this ___ day of ______, 2010, by and between the Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation (“VFSF”) and the City of Cloverdale (“City”). VFSF and the City are collectively referred to as the “Parties.”

Recitals

WHEREAS, VFSF has entered an agreement with Boback Emad (“Artist”), owner and creator of an artwork entitled “Shadows of Eternity” (“Artwork”) pursuant towhich agreement VFSF is authorized to enter into this Agreement providing for cooperation of the Parties concerning the placement and display of the Artwork at the Display Location specified in this Agreement. The Artwork is further described in Exhibit A, which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the City has a landscape improvement plan for Thyme Square, which includes areas set aside for public art; and

WHEREAS, VFSF has offered the Artwork for inclusion in the Thyme Square landscape improvement plan; and

WHEREAS, the Artwork will be displayed in Thyme Square Plaza on Cloverdale Boulevard (“Display Location”), subject to the terms of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Display Location is public fee property owned by the City, and the Display Location is further described in Exhibit B, which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, VFSF and the City desire to establish the terms and conditions governing transportation, installation, display, maintenance, removal, return shipment, liability, and insurance concerning the Artwork; and

WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution No. ______adopted ______, 2010, has authorized the City Manager to execute this Agreement on behalf of the City;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

Agreement

Pg 5 1. Recitals Part of Agreement. The Parties understand and agree that the Recitals above are true and correct and are made a part of this Agreement.

2. Grant of License to Display Artwork. The City hereby grants VFSF a license (“License”) to display the Artwork at the Display Location, subject to the terms of this Agreement. The Parties understand and agree that the License granted to VFSF to display the Artwork at the Display Location under this Agreement conveys only license rights, and that this Agreement does not convey any other interest or estate in the Display Location, and that VFSF’s rights under this Agreement are personal to VFSF, non-transferable or assignable (except as otherwise specified in this Agreement), and terminable by the Parties and revocable by the City, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement creates or may be construed to create rights of VFSF that are property interests or estates, such as lease or easement rights, nor may any conduct of a party or of the Parties create or be construed to create such property interests or estates, or to create a license coupled with an interest or an irrevocable license. As a material element of the consideration for this Agreement, VFSF hereby waives, releases and disclaims on behalf of VFSF and any successors and assigns, any interest or estate in the Display Location (except for the license granted hereunder), including, but not limited to, any right or claim to a license coupled with an interest or an irrevocable license, arising or alleged to arise in connection with this Agreement.

3. Grant of License Conditioned on Obtaining All Required Permits and Approvals. The Parties understand and agree that the License granted pursuant to this Agreement is conditioned on VFSF obtaining all required permits and approvals from any government agency or body, including, but not limited to, the City, with jurisdiction over display of the Artwork at the Display Location. Permits that may be required for display of the Artwork at the Display Location include, but are not limited to, building permits. The design and construction of any proposed improvement or structure for displaying the Artwork at the Display Location will be subject to City approval and may also be subject to separate permitting requirements. The City will provide and obtain all City permits that may be required for display of the Artwork at the Display Location.

4. Term and Termination of Agreement

a. Expiration. This Agreement shall commence on the date of the last signature of the Parties (“Commencement Date”) and continue in effect for 5 years. The initial term may be extended by the mutual agreement of VFSF and the City Manager, unless earlier terminated in accordance with this provision 4 or renewed or extended in accordance with provision 14, below. The term of this Agreement may only be extended by a written agreement signed by both Parties.

b. Termination Without Cause. The City reserves the right, at any time without cause, to revoke the License granted under this Agreement, direct that the Artwork be

Pg 6 removed, require VFSF to load and return ship the Artwork and terminate this Agreement by giving 180 days’ advance written notice to VFSF.

c. Termination for Cause. The City also reserves the right to revoke the License granted under this Agreement, direct that the Artwork be removed, require VFSF to load and return ship the Artwork and terminate this Agreement for cause, by giving 90 days’ advance written notice to VFSF. In its sole discretion, the City may permit VFSF a specified time within which to cure the default giving cause for termination of this Agreement. For purposes of this paragraph, “cause” shall be deemed the breach by VFSF of a material term or condition of this Agreement that is not due to facts or circumstances caused by or within the control of the City.

5. Obligations of the Parties Concerning Shipment, Unloading, Installation, Signage, Maintenance, Removal and Return Shipment of Artwork

The Parties will perform their respective obligations under this provision in accordance with a schedule to be determined between the Parties.

a. Obligations of VFSF. VFSF will be responsible for the following:

1. Coordinating with the City and Artist for shipment of the Artwork to the Display Location and unloading of the Artwork at the Display Location at a date and time and in a manner approved by the City. 2. Coordinating with the City and Artist for installation of the Artwork at the Display Location, subject to City review and approval of installation design, engineering and construction. 3. Coordinating with the City and Artist for relocation of the Artwork and arranging for the loading, shipping, and unloading of the Artwork from the Display Location to a new location if the Artwork is relocated during the term of this Agreement. 4. Coordinating with the City concerning any signage related to the Artwork. 5. Removal of the Artwork from the Display Location in coordination with the City upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 6. Loading and return shipment of the Artwork upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement at a date and time and in a manner coordinated with and approved by the City. 7. Coordinating with the Artist to provide cleaning instructions to the City for minor maintenance of the Artwork. Cleaning instructions shall include appropriate methods by which City personnel can safely remove bird guano or graffiti without risk of damaging the Artwork.

Pg 7 8. All necessary repairs of the Artwork. For the purposes of this section, “repairs” shall be defined as actions such as repainting of the Artwork or repair of dents and other damage. 9. Design and installation of signage identifying the Artwork and "no climbing" signs at the Display Location in coordination with the City.

b. Obligations of the City. The City will be responsible for the following:

1. Coordinating shipment and unloading of the Artwork with VFSF and the Artist, including approving date and time of unloading. 2. Preparation of the site at the Display Location and construction of installation improvements, if any, at the Display Location. Said improvements may include, but are not limited to, any foundations, footings, or concrete base. 3. Coordinating with VFSF and the Artist for the relocation of the Artwork from the Display Location to a new location and preparing the site at the new location, including construction of improvements at the new location such as any foundation, footings, or concrete base, if the Artwork is relocated during the term of this Agreement. 4. Providing all necessary permits and waiver or payment of any required permitting fees. 5. Inspecting the Artwork to ensure the Artwork can be safely displayed at the Display Location. 6. Final approval of installation design and construction, if any, in coordination with VFSF and the Artist. 7. Necessary minor maintenance of the Artwork during the period the Artwork is displayed at the Display Location. For the purposes of this Agreement “minor maintenance” shall be limited to actions such as removal of bird guano or graffiti, in a manner specified in the cleaning instructions provided by VFSF and the Artist in accordance with section 5(a)(7) above. Minor maintenance shall not include painting or any other repair in accordance with provision 5(a)(8). 8. Coordination with VFSF concerning loading and shipment of the Artwork upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement, including approval of the date and time of loading. 9. The City agrees to promptly report to VFSF whenever it becomes aware of any damage to the Artwork or injury to person or property in connection with the Artwork. The City agrees to cooperate with VFSF in its repair efforts.

6. Costs.

a. Costs Borne by VFSF. VFSF will be responsible for the following costs pursuant to this Agreement:

Pg 8 1. Obtaining authorization of the Artist to enter into this Agreement providing for the cooperation of the City and VFSF concerning placement and display of the Artwork at the Display Location. 2. Shipment of the Artwork to the Display Location and unloading of the Artwork at the Display Location. 3. Loading, shipping and unloading of the Artwork if the Artwork is relocated during the term of this Agreement. 4. Installation of the Artwork at the Display Location. 5. Design and installation of signage identifying the Artwork and "no climbing" signs and related improvements, if any, concerning the Artwork at the Display Location. 6. Removal of the Artwork from the Display Location and needed restoration of the Display Location, if any, upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 7. Loading and return shipment of the Artwork upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. Repairs and maintenance of the Artwork (other than minor maintenance costs that will be borne by the City) in accordance with provision 5(a)(7) and/or insurance covering VFSF’s interest in the Artwork for the period from and including loading and shipment to the Display Location, through the entire period the Artwork is displayed at the Display Location. VFSF understands and agrees that the City will provide no insurance coverage for VFSF’s interest in or the value of the Artwork. 9. Loading and return shipment from the Display Location upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

b. Costs Borne by the City. The City will be responsible for the following costs pursuant to this Agreement:

1. Necessary minor maintenance of the Artwork, such as removal of graffiti or bird guano, in accordance with provision 5(b)(7). 2. Subject to VFSF’s representation in provision 8, insurance coverage for liability to third parties for personal injury or property damage arising from display of the Artwork at the Display Location during the entire period the Artwork is displayed at the Display Location under the City’s existing liability coverage. 3. Site preparation at the Display Location and construction of installation improvements, if any, at the Display Location, or any new location if the Artwork is relocated during the term of this Agreement. Said improvements may include, but are not limited to any foundations, footings, or concrete base as required per structural engineering specifications.

Pg 9 7. Remedies on Failure to Remove Artwork. If VFSF fails to remove or negotiate a new removal date and return ship the Artwork in accordance with this Agreement within 30 days after prior written notice from the City to VFSF of the time for removal and return shipment of the Artwork, the City may remove the Artwork and return it to VFSF or to storage in the name of VFSF and recover from VFSF the City’s actual costs in such effort plus interest thereon at the legal rate from a date that is two business days after the City gives VFSF written demand for payment, until the date that reimbursement is made by VFSF to the City.

8. Representations of the Parties. The Parties make the following representations pursuant to this Agreement:

a. Representation of VFSF. By executing this Agreement VFSF represents and warrants to the City on behalf of VFSF and VFSF’s successors and assigns that VFSF has sufficient legal authority with respect to the Artwork to bind VFSF concerning all the obligations, covenants, terms and conditions that apply to VFSF pursuant to this Agreement, and that this representation and VFSF’s execution of this Agreement is in derogation of the interest of no other person or entity with respect to the Artwork, including, but not limited to, the Artist. VFSF understands and agrees that this representation of VFSF is a material element of consideration of this Agreement and that the City’s execution of this Agreement is in reliance on VFSF’s representation.

b. Representation of the City. By executing this Agreement the City represents and warrants to VFSF on behalf of the City and the City’s successors and assigns that the City has sufficient legal authority with respect to the Display Location to bind the City concerning all the obligations, covenants, terms and conditions that apply to the City pursuant to this Agreement, and that this representation and the City’s execution of this Agreement is in derogation of the interest of no other person or entity with respect to the Display Location. The City understands and agrees that this representation of the City is a material element of consideration of this Agreement and that VFSF’s execution of this Agreement is in reliance on the City’s representation.

9. Indemnities and Releases.

a. Indemnity and Release by VFSF. Subject to the City’s maintenance responsibility under paragraph 5(b)(7) and the City’s representations in provision 8, VFSF agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, defend, release and forever discharge the City and its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (collectively, “City Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, actions, causes of action, obligations, liabilities, indebtedness, breach of duty, claims for injunctive relief and any other equitable relief, suits, liens, losses, costs or expenses, whether known or unknown, fixed or contingent, liquidated, or unliquidated, suspected or unsuspected, foreseen or unforeseen (including, without limitation, attorney's fees and costs and fees of litigation and liability of or to VFSF) (collectively, “Liability”) that arise out of, are based upon, or relate in any way to the Artwork pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the shipment, unloading, installation, display, removal,

Pg 10 reloading, and return shipment of the Artwork, or VFSF’s failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement. Subject to VFSF’s representation in provision 8, and notwithstanding the foregoing, VFSF’s obligation to indemnify, hold harmless, defend, release and forever discharge the City Indemnitees in accordance with this provision shall not apply to Liability to third parties for personal injury or property damage arising from display of the Artwork at the Display Location from the time the Artwork is installed at the Display Location in accordance with this Agreement to the time the Artwork is removed from the Display Location in accordance with this Agreement. Further, and notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that this Agreement is a “construction contract” as defined in California Civil Code section 2783, as amended from time to time, VFSF’s duty to indemnify in accordance with this provision shall not apply when prohibited by California Civil Code section 2782.

b. Indemnity and Release by the City. Subject to VFSF’s representation in provision 8, the City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, defend, release and forever discharge VFSF and its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, and the Artist (collectively, “VFSF Indemnitees”) from and against any and all Liability that arises out of, is based upon, or relates in any way to Liability to third parties for personal injury or property damage arising from display of the Artwork at the Display Location from the time the Artwork is installed at the Display Location in accordance with this Agreement to the time the Artwork is removed from the Display Location in accordance with this Agreement. The City agrees to promptly report directly to VFSF whenever any damage occurs to the Artwork or injury occurs to a person on account of the Artwork. The City agrees to cooperate with VFSF and the Artist as assessments of damage are made and to assist where possible as repairs are performed.

c. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542. The releases by VFSF and the City pursuant to this provision 9 are intended to extend to all liability, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, and each party expressly waives and relinquishes any rights and benefits, which it has or may have under Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California, which provides:

“A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.”

10. Statutory Notice Regarding Possessory Use Tax. VFSF is advised that under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 107.6, execution of this Agreement may create a possessory interest in VFSF subject to property taxation. VFSF hereby agrees that if such possessory interest is created and is subject to property taxation, VFSF shall be solely responsible for the payment of said property taxes levied on any such interest.

11. Survival. The Parties’ respective obligations in provisions 7, 8 and 9 will survive any termination or expiration of this Agreement.

12. Notice. Notice to the Parties under this Agreement will be given as follows:

To VFSF: Attn: Administrator

Pg 11 Voigt Family Sculpture Foundation 400 Breezewood Drive Geyeserville, California 95441 (707) 857-1733

To City: City Manager City of Cloverdale 124 N. Cloverdale Blvd. Cloverdale, California 95425 (707) 894-2521

13. Attorneys’ Fees.In the event either party brings an action to interpret or enforce any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action, in addition to any other damages or costs to which it may be entitled, shall recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in such action.

14. Entire Agreement; Modification. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties and supersedes and replaces all prior agreements of the Parties, whether verbal or written, as to the subject matter hereof. The terms of this Agreement may only be changed by a writing signed by representatives authorized to bind each party.

15. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Any action arising from this Agreement will be venued in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Sonoma, State of California.

16. Binding Effect. This Agreement, except as otherwise specifically provided herein, shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns.

VFSF

By: Date: Shanta Anderson, Administrator

THE CITY OF CLOVERDALE

By: Date: Nina D. Regor, City Manager

Pg 12 Attest: ______Jill Garibaldi, Deputy City Clerk

Approved as to form:

______Eric W. Danly, City Attorney

Pg 13 Exhibit A Artwork

The Artwork subject to this Agreement is a sculpture entitled “Shadows of Eternity.” The sculpture is 20 feet tall, and approximately 20 feet in diameter at the widest point, which is the base. The artwork is made of stainless steel and steel, and consists of a stainless steel ring intersected by three steel columns. A graphic depicting the Artwork is attached to and made a part of this Exhibit. The Artist indicates that the Artwork has a value of $ 58,000.

Pg 14 Exhibit B Display Location

Pg 15 Water Conservation Demonstration Garden

15 C. ‛ O.C.

O. TYP. 15 ‛ ‛ O.C. Wildflower TYP. 15 8’ - 0” TYP. 15‛ O.C. Meadow C. TYP. 2’ - 0” ‛ O. 40 15 TYP. fm backside‛ - 0” of

Washington Street C. Sidewalk 4x4 Raise ‛ O. 15 TYP. with Seatd Wo lsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd lsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kjasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas fl kjasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas od Planters dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf halskdjh dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf halskdjh fl kasjhd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kasjhd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd 2’ - 0” ing 2 sides fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlkfjha sldkjfh fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlkfjha sldkjfh aslkjdhf laksjdhf lkasjhdf aslkjdhf laksjdhf lkasjhdf lkajd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjahd 4’ - 0” - 4’ lkajd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjahd fl kjasd fl kjahsd fl kjahsd fl kjasd fl kjahsd fl kjahsd fl kjhasd lkfjhas dlkfjha slkdjfh fl kjhasd lkfjhas dlkfjha slkdjfh - 0” alksjdhf lalkajshd fl kjasd ‛ alksjdhf lalkajshd fl kjasd lsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl k- fl kjasd fl kjhas dlkfhalskjdh a fl kjasd fl kjhas dlkfhalskjdh a jasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf halskdjh lkj lkjha sdlkfjh asldkjfh alskjd lkj lkjha sdlkfjh asldkjfh alskjd fl kasjhd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlkfjha sld- lakjsdh fl kajshdf lkajhdf lkh4 lakjsdh fl kajshdf lkajhdf lkh4 kjfh aslkjdhf laksjdhf lkasjhdf lkajd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjahd pt4 ptlsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd 25 pt4 ptlsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd fl kjasd fl kjahsd fl kjahsd fl kjhasd lkfjhas dlkfjha slkdjfh fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd alksjdhf lalkajshd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjhas dlkfhalskjdh a lkj fl kjasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas CL fl kjasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas lkjha sdlkfjh asldkjfh alskjd lakjsdh fl kajshdf lkajhdf lkh4 dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf halskdjh dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf halskdjh pt4 ptlsdkj klasdf lkajsd fl kajsd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kajshd fl kasjhd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kasjhd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kjasd fl kajd fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlfkjhas dlkfjhaslkdjf fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlkfjha sldkjfh fl kjahsd lfkjhas dlkfjha sldkjfh Retaining Wall (3) 2 x 2 PVC Panels TOW TOW 18” 18” High

4 x 8 Plywood Panel + + 0” 1’ - 0” - 1’ 2x2 Grid

4 x 4 PT Post (Painted) Gravel Paving & Native Grasses Native Grasses

Concrete 2’ - 0” - 2’ Gravel Swale Interpretive Signage 6” Water 4x8 Conservation Panels Gravel Paving Interpretive Signage Demonstration Garden TOW 18” + Swale TOW 0” + Existing Sidewalk

Citrus Fair Drive

Tie drain line into existing curb inlet Enlargement - Thyme Square Plaza Citrus Fair Drive & Cloverdale Boulevard . 20 Scale

Wildflower Meadow Wildflower Meadow

Enlarged Area

Healdsburg

Interpretive Signage

Water Conservation Enlarged Area Demonstration Garden Avenue Install Water Conservation D.I. Demonstration Garden Swale Native Swale Install D.I. Grasses

Interpretive Signage

Water Conservation Bosque of Shade Trees (E) Enlarged Area MH Demonstration Garden Raised Wood Planters & Gravel Paving Public Art Native Grasses Public Art

Sidewalk Bosque of Shade Trees Gravel Path in Raised Wood Planters and Gravel Paving Public Art Area Wave Banners Cloverdale Boulevard Illustrative Landscape Plan Thyme Square Plaza Cloverdale, California 30 Scale . September 18, 2009 10 ‛ 15 ‛-0” O.C. Typ. 15 ‛-0” CL O.C. Typ. 15 ‛-0” O.C. Interpretive Signage 15 4x8 Panels (See Detail) ‛-0” Edge of Planting Area O.C. 15 Water Conservation Install New ‛-0” Demonstration Garden tie intoDrain existing Inlet & O.C. Typ. 15 ‛-0” Storm Drain O.C. 10 Typ. ‛ 10‛ 15‛-0” 15‛-0” 15‛-0” 15‛-0” 15‛-0” 15‛-0” 10‛ 4x4 Raised Wood Planters O.C. O.C. O.C. O.C. O.C. O.C. Seating 1 or 2 sides (typ) Typ. Typ. Typ. Typ. Typ. Typ.

Edge of Planting Area ‛ Seating 1 Side 10 ONLY (E) MH 4x4 Raised Wood Planters -0” Seating 1 Side ‛

Seating 1 or 2 sides (typ) O.C. Gravel Paving ONLY 15 Native Grasses ‛ 5 ‛ ‛-0” Existing Sidewalk 6 5

‛-0” 15 O.C. TYP.

‛-0” 15 Back of Sidewalk O.C. TYP.

‛-0” 15 O.C. TYP.

‛-0” 10 Thyme Square Plaza - South NW Corner - Healdsburg Ave. & Cloverdale Boulevard - 20 Scale Thyme Square Plaza - Central Midpoint - Healdsburg Ave. & Citrus Fair Drive on Cloverdale Blvd. - 20 Scale

Interpretive Signage 4x8 Panels (See Detail) 6‛-0” Water Conservation Demonstration Garden

17‛-0” Wildflower 15‛ O.C. O.C. ‛ TYP. 15 15 TYP. ‛ O.C. Meadow 3‛-0” TYP. 12‛-0” CL Tree Retaining\

‛ O.C. Wall 15 TYP. 40 fm backside‛ - 0” of

‛ O.C. 4x4 Rais Sidew 15 TYP. with Seatinged Wood 2 sideP alk

lanters ‛ - 0” s 25 CL

Retaining Wall TOW TOW 18” High 18” + 0” + 2x2 Grid Gravel Paving & Native Grasses Native Grasses Install New Drain Inlet & tie into existing curb inlet

Water Gravel Pa Conservation Demonstration ving Garden

TOW 18” +

alk TOW 0” + Existing Sidew Construction Layout Plan Thyme Square Plaza Tie drain line into Cloverdale, California existing curb inlet Thyme Square Plaza - North SW Corner - Citrus Fair Drive & Cloverdale Boulevard - 20 Scale 20 Scale . September 18, 2009 City Council/Redev. Agency Agenda Item: 11 Agenda Item Summary Meeting Date: February 10, 2010

Agenda Section Staff Contact Finance Subcommittee Nina D. Regor, City Manager Agenda Item Title CPAC Building and Operational Funding Update Summary The Cloverdale Redevelopment Agency has provided and further committed significant operating and capital funds to the Cloverdale Performing Arts Council (CPAC). The proposed Performing Arts Center (committed funding of $1.8 million) is one of the City’s 4-Corners projects. Because of the size of the financial commitment to CPAC, and because CPAC is a relatively new organization, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Board has requested a presentation about the financial viability of both the building project and CPAC’s ongoing operations. Staff has received information from CPAC and is in the process of evaluating it. An update will be provided at the meeting. Options N/A Budget/Financial Impact The Redevelopment Agency has committed $1.8 million to purchase and retrofit the former Cloverdale Fitness Center into a Performing Arts Center. The Agency has also provided operational funding to CPAC for three years. For FY 2009/10, the operational funding is budgeted at $32,600. Subcommittee Recommendation N/A Recommended Council Action Provide feedback and direction to staff.

Attachments: N/A cc:

P.O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. • Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 • Telephone (707) 894-2521 • FAX (707) 894-3451 Pg 1 (Rev. 01/09)