City Council Hearing April 4, 2017

From Draft Documents to Final Adoption Summer 2016 Released Draft Documents Fall 2016 Received Comments January 2017 Released Final EIR February 2017 Responses to GP/CAP Comments March/April 2017 Public Hearings Planning Commission 3/2 & 3/16 City Council 4/4 & 4/18

City Council Hearings April 4 April 18 Staff presentation Questions Public Comments Direction / Intent Motions April 18 Present findings and final approval documents Public Comment Final Action

Intent Motions Direction related to the Council’s intent to certify the EIR Direction related to the Council’s intent to adopt the 2035 General Plan Direction related to the Council’s intent to adopt the 2035 CAP

Background

Woodland’s General Plan History 1958 City’s First General Plan Preserve residential character and develop more complete central business district. Anticipated rapid growth to the south and west of CRs 25 and 98 1979 Full General Plan Update Five year study process. City established an urban limit line and phasing plan accompanied by an urban development policy with the County 1988 Revised General Plan Allowed new development East of CR 101 and South of I-5 as the next phase (Southeast Area) City adopted the Southeast Area Specific Plan in 1990 1996 General Plan approved by vote on November 5, 1996 Provided for growth to the South and West of CR 102, created Urban Reserve for lands east of CR 102 except for the Gateway I center location.

Voter approved General Plan Voter approved Urban Limit Line History of Key Development Decisions Southeast Area Specific Plan Downtown Specific Plan Voter approved General Plan Spring Lake Specific Plan and EIR Community Facilities and Infrastructure Voter approved Urban Limit Line Infrastructure Investment – WPCF and WDCWA 1990 1993 1996 2001 2004 2006 2010

Planning Area (Urban Limit Line – Voter approved in 2006) Yolo County Yolo County

Envision Woodland

Vision Statement In 2035, Woodland is a highly desirable community to live, learn, work and recreate. It has maintained its small-town feel while maturing into an attractive, vibrant, and sustainable city that celebrates its architectural heritage and cultural diversity. Woodland is a healthy community with livable neighborhoods, a thriving downtown, well maintained infrastructure, excellent schools and recreational amenities connected by a seamless network of trails and paths. The city is the region’s center of agricultural technology and food production, and is recognized globally as a leader in sustainable agriculture. The community is prosperous and fiscally sound, offering abundant employment opportunities to its diverse and creative workforce. Woodland has become a destination for visitors seeking to experience its unique agricultural, historical, recreational, cultural and entertainment amenities.

Consistent Themes Downtown and corridor infill Economic development, job growth Minimize community risk and maximize fiscal return Agricultural Heritage Flood protection Create new housing and employment opportunities Flexibility

Relationship between the EIR, CAP & General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Provides analysis of environmental impacts for General Plan and CAP 2035 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Set of strategies intended to reduce GHG emissions and mitigate climate change Includes reduction targets for 2020 and 2035 Consistent with the General Plan General Plan 2035 Long-range planning document for the development of Woodland through 2035 Incorporates identified mitigation as general plan polices or implementation actions

Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Released September 2016 Analyzed General Plan Goals and Policies & 2 “equal weight” alternatives Analyzed the 2035 CAP 13 Comments received FEIR released January 2017

Climate Action Plan Draft released September 2016 Consistent with the General Plan Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets: 15% below 2005 levels by 2020 2.25 MT CO2e per service population (residents + jobs) per year by 2035 Response to comments provided in Attachment G

General Plan 2035 Public Review Draft Released July 8, 2016 Outlines a vision of Woodland’s long-term physical and economic development and community enhancement through the Plan’s horizon year of 2035 Provides goals and policies that will allow this vision to be accomplished Establishes a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards Over 400 individual comments

General Plan Elements Land Use Circulation Economic Public Healthy

Comments Received on Public Review Draft Received written and oral comments from over 100 individuals, groups, and agencies with over 400 individual comments Each comment carefully reviewed with responses provided Proposed revisions reflect these comments as well as those by Staff The comments and responses are part of the public record Comments, responses and proposed changes were included in the Planning Commission Report of March 2, 2017 as Attachment “F”

Example From Attachment “F”

Changes to the Draft Land Use Element Clarify that the minimum jobs to housing ratio is 1:1 Add text that all new growth areas shall strive for zero net energy Provide consideration for development in multi-family or mixed use to exceed FAR requirements if it offers significant community benefit Add text that the Flood Study Area boundaries will be updated through a GPA once the future flood project is determined Add language that permanently conserved farmland used for agricultural mitigation shall be of the same type as the farmland converted to urban development, at a 1:1 ratio, and as close to the Urban Limit Line as possible.

Land Use Diagram

Growth Strategy Downtown and Corridor Infill Complete Spring Lake Advance SP-1A as Job Centered Development Consider New Growth Areas

Key Policies Related to New Growth Areas Policy 2.L.1 – The General Plan contemplates growth which may occur in new Specific Plan Areas. The General Plan does not prioritize or sequence possible growth. Rather, approval of new Specific Plan areas will require careful analysis for consistency with all General Plan policies and satisfactory resolution of site specific constraints unique to each area. Policy 2.B.1 - New specific Plans shall examine impacts on the completion of infrastructure and amenities within existing specific plan areas. Policy 2.B.2 – Residential construction in SP-2 and SP-3 is prohibited until 200-year flood protection is in place. However, SP-2 and SP-3 may proceed with planning in advance of flood protection at any time, provided that the City shall not enter into a Development Agreement for any property located within a floodplain unless the City has imposed conditions that will ensure 200-year flood protection…

Approach to New Growth Areas Provides a framework to allow the consideration of future development in new growth areas Allows for independent review of development benefits and drawbacks at the time when opportunities or applications emerge Considers future development impacts on current development

Growth Assumptions Total growth up to 7,000 Dwelling Units and 17,386,000 Square Feet Non-Residential (employment and commercial) Maximum Growth for Each Development Area Consistent with the development numbers analyzed in the EIR over the 20 year planning horizon

Planning Commission Recommendations Recommended Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, approval of the 2035 Climate Action Plan and 2035 General Plan with additional changes proposed by staff during the March 2 and March 16, 2017 public hearings. Recommended the following amendments: Agricultural Buffer reduced from 300-feet to 150-feet (Policy 7.C.5) Change “Equal Priority” terminology to “recognize the importance of all transportation modes” (Table 3-2) Modify the City’s 900 acres to show as “other land” (Figure 7-4)

Policy 7.C.5 – Agricultural Buffer Policy 7.C.5 Agricultural Buffer. Require new development that occurs at the edge of the ULL to be set back a minimum of 300 150 feet from adjacent agricultural land where possible. Equivalent means of providing agricultural buffers may be considered by the Planning Commission on a case by case basis for parcels where development potential would be precluded or severely limited as a result of the required buffer size. The buffer shall be landscaped/vegetated and may include public right of way. (EIR Mitigation Measure 4.2-3)

Mode Priority Discussion July 8, 2016 Draft Version Suggested Revision in Question *Equal Priority: recognize the importance of all transportation modes

Policy 2.A.3 – Agricultural Mitigation … “For projects proposing to convert agricultural land to urban use, require soils analysis to determine farmland classification for purposes of determining appropriate mitigation as part of environmental review conducted for the project.”

Proposed Errata Urban Form Characteristics for MD, HD, SP “Require 360 –degree architectural treatments, such that all publicly visible sides of a structure receive enhanced architectural treatment.”

Intent Motions A. Provide direction regarding the Council’s intent to certify the EIR, including: 1. Provide direction regarding farmland mapping on the City’s 900 acres 2. Identify any other changes to the EIR desired by the Council Provide direction regarding the Council’s intent to adopt the 2035 General Plan, including: 1. Provide direction regarding the clarification of the street typology table (Table 3-2) 2. Provide direction on the urban form errata 3. Provide direction on the other components of the Planning Commission recommendation which incorporate staff’s recommended changes as presented in the March 2nd Planning Commission staff report. 4. Identify any other changes to the proposed General Plan desired by the Council C. Provide direction regarding the Council’s intent to adopt the 2035 CAP, including: 1. Identify any other changes to the proposed CAP desired by the Council

- City Council Questions - Public Comments

The THE END