Cotati Council approves 78-unit Redwood Row mixed‑use development with conditions

The Cotati City Council on Tuesday approved a proposal to build a 78‑unit mixed‑use development called Redwood Row on a 10.62‑acre vacant site adjacent to Lowe’s near State Route 116, adopting the project’s preliminary design review, tree‑removal permit, parkland dedication and a vesting tentative map by a 5‑0 roll‑call vote.

The project, led by City Ventures, would include 34 townhouse‑style for‑sale units (with up to 33 optional accessory dwelling units), a 44‑unit apartment building proposed as deed‑restricted affordable rental housing, about 10,000 square feet of ground‑floor commercial space facing Gravenstein Highway (Highway 116), and roughly 1 acre of parkland across two public parks, including a dog park and a playground area.

The council approved the project after roughly four hours of staff and applicant presentations, technical questions from members and public testimony for and against the development. Planning staff described the project’s entitlements, environmental review and density‑bonus calculations; the applicant presented architectural renderings and amenity plans; and council members pressed the team on traffic access, affordable housing guarantees, tree protection and long‑term maintenance of the proposed public‑access parks.

Why it matters: Redwood Row is sited in an area the city has long targeted for infill development and is expected to add a substantial number of housing units in Cotati, including a larger share of restricted‑rent units than the city’s inclusionary obligation requires. The project is tied to the city’s Highway 116 safety and West Cotati Avenue realignment plans, and council members flagged the timing of those roadway improvements as a safety concern for vehicles entering and exiting the site prior to the full highway project.

Project details and approvals • Units and mix: Staff said the site is planned for 78 units: 34 townhouse‑style condos (for sale) and a separate 44‑unit apartment building proposed as the site’s affordable rental component. Under the state density‑bonus rules and the city code in effect when the applicant filed its SB 330 vesting application, the applicant elected a 20% density bonus and proposed 44 affordable units though the project’s minimum inclusionary requirement would have been lower. The applicant also proposes up to 33 optional ADUs built as plumbed spaces on ground floors (25% cap under the city’s ADU policy). • Parkland and public access: The applicant offered about 1.08 acres of parkland via public access easement and proposed playground, dog‑park, seating and bike parking. Staff said the city code requires 1.88 acres for the number of units proposed; the application offers park improvements and will need to demonstrate the value of those improvements before a final fee is calculated for any remaining obligation. • Trees and environment: The project retains several large oaks, integrates a major existing oak into a park, and proposes removal of a low‑value eucalyptus plus possibly two oaks that may be affected by future roadway work. Staff and the applicant committed to an oak protection plan and additional mitigation measures. The city concluded the project is consistent with the general plan and determined the project may be found exempt from further CEQA analysis under CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (projects consistent with a community plan or zoning where the general plan EIR already addressed cumulative impacts). • Traffic and access: The site will have two driveways on Highway 116 plus emergency access connections to the Lowe’s parking area. Traffic analyses presented by the city’s independent consultant (WTrans) and the applicant showed the project’s weekday peak hour turning volumes would not meet the signal‑warrant threshold. The highway realignment and full signalization remain a separate project the city is designing; staff and the traffic consultant said a short interim period without a signal is possible and outlined interim turn‑lane and acceleration‑lane options that would require Caltrans review and approval.

Public testimony and stakeholders Supporters included housing advocates and land‑use nonprofit representatives who called the project a model of infill that adds a mix of tenure and income levels and contributes new parkland, active‑transportation links and solar‑all‑electric homes. Generation Housing and several residents testified in favor. Opponents raised concerns about losing a key retail‑appropriate site, traffic safety on Highway 116 before full intersection improvements are built and a history of approved projects not completing all promised components.

Noted speakers: JP Harris, senior planner for Cotati City (staff report); Adam Foster, project representative for City Ventures; Samantha Hazzer, City Ventures; Dailene Whitlock (WTrans traffic consultant); Rich Wallach (Burbank Housing, affordable housing partner‑in‑interest); and public speakers including Jamie Tabore, Omar Lopez (Generation Housing), Beth Craven (resident), Sonia Bick Barwick (Generation Housing), Chris Palomo (NorCal Carpenters Local 751), Neil Hancock and Laurie Alderman. Council members who led the questioning were Sparks, Harvey, Savage, Lemus and Mayor Ford.

Council action and conditions The council approved the resolution adopting the preliminary design review, tree‑removal permit, parkland dedication and tentative map and found the project consistent with the general plan and its EIR. The vote was 5 affirmative, 0 opposed, 0 abstentions (Council Member Savage: yes; Council Member Sparks: yes; Council Member Harvey: yes; Vice Mayor Lemus: yes; Mayor Ford: yes).

Because council members pressed for added clarity and enforceable commitments, the motion and staff directions included several explicit expectations and conditions the applicant agreed to accept: recorded affordable‑housing regulatory agreements before recordation of the final map (or before issuance of building permits), refinement of CC&Rs and HOA language to guarantee public access and long‑term maintenance obligations for the parkland (including city review of any future park redesign), an oak protection plan that addresses safety inspections and long‑term retention measures, a requirement to pre‑plumb the 33 ADU locations (and offer them as an option to buyers) and including language on interim traffic mitigation (propose a right‑turn‑only measure to Caltrans for interim access, subject to Caltrans approval). Council also directed staff to return a tighter draft of the affordable‑housing regulatory agreement for final council review before map recordation.

What was not decided or remains to do • The project requires coordination and final design approval with Caltrans for Highway 116 frontage improvements and any temporary interim access measures; Caltrans has final authority over highway changes. • Parkland dedication accounting: staff said the final fee (if any) for the remaining parkland obligation will depend on the final cost estimate for park improvements; that calculation was not finalized at the hearing. • Timing and sequencing of construction: staff and the applicant said mass grading and permit staging are planned so market‑rate construction can proceed while affordable‑housing funding is secured, but the council required recorded agreements tying the parcels together so the affordable building cannot be omitted after market‑rate units are completed.

Next steps Council authorized staff to finalize the resolution and associated conditions; staff will prepare the affordable‑housing regulatory agreement for council approval before map recordation. The applicant and potential affordable‑housing partner (Burbank Housing) must complete required funding steps and building permits before final map recording and occupancies.

“Redwood Row offers a model for sustainable and inclusive development,” said Omar Lopez of Generation Housing in public comment, while Council members said they sought firm, recorded assurances that the affordable building will be completed and that interim highway access will prioritize safety until the West Cotati/Highway 116 intersection project is finished.

The council’s approval clears the way for the developer to proceed to final engineering and permitting subject to conditions and the city’s written agreements.