Planning Commission recommends council certify Final EIR, approves five resolutions for Spring Lake Village East Grove expansion amid neighbor opposition

The Santa Rosa Planning Commission on March 26 recommended that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and approved five related resolutions for the Spring Lake Village East Grove project, a proposed 32-unit expansion of the Spring Lake Village continuing-care retirement community.

Staff described the project as an expansion that would add 32 independent senior units (14 cottage-style units and an 18-unit three-story villa), a community building, and on- and off-site improvements. The proposal requires a conditional-use permit for a community care facility with more than six beds, a hillside development permit, rezoning of 225 Los Alamos Road from rural residential to a plan-development (PD) district, and a PD policy-statement text amendment.

City staff and consultant GHD summarized the CEQA process: a Draft EIR circulated in 2021 evaluated the originally proposed project and a design alternative; the applicant and staff later refined and advanced an "Alternative 2 / Maximum Avoidance" configuration that reduced footprint and grading. The consultant said the Final EIR documents mitigation measures addressing wildfire risk, construction and operational noise, biological resources (special-status species and replacement of a very small seasonal wetland), paleontological resources, and tribal cultural resources including monitoring and avoidance measures. The consultant concluded the refined Alternative 2 does not result in significant unavoidable impacts.

Applicant and project representatives emphasized community benefits and ongoing tribal consultation. Mary McMullen, chief operating officer for Front Porch (the nonprofit owner/operator of Spring Lake Village), said the modest expansion "will address not only the need for senior housing, but also general housing in Santa Rosa because we attract local folks who move to our community and free up housing for new families." Counsel Barbara Schussman described the extensive tribal consultation and the applicant's agreement to additional studies and monitoring measures.

During public comment several nearby residents from Villa Los Alamos and other speakers urged denial or further study, citing: removal of roughly 264 trees (including live oak, valley oak and redwood), potential impacts on wildlife and threatened species, noise and light intrusion, traffic-safety concerns at Highway 12/Los Alamos and Montgomery Drive, and wildfire-evacuation challenges. One resident asked whether replacement plantings would match the species and age of trees being removed.

Staff and the EIR consultant responded that the Final EIR and mitigation measures address those topics: the EIR documents 264 trees slated for removal (151 nonexempt) and requires tree replacement with suitable and similar species per the city's tree ordinance; traffic/collision analyses show the intersection's collision rate is lower than statewide comparables; the fire department described evacuation planning improvements and partnership exercises with large care facilities; and a published noise study and mitigation measures are included in the EIR.

After discussion the commission voted on five separate resolutions to recommend the council: (1) certify the Final EIR and adopt CEQA findings and a mitigation-monitoring program; (2) approve the minor conditional-use permit for the 32-unit community care facility; (3) approve the hillside development permit; (4) recommend rezoning to PD; and (5) adopt the PD text amendment. Vice Chair Duggan moved the EIR resolution (seconded by Commissioner Sanders); each resolution passed on recorded votes of 6 ayes with Commissioner Horton recused.

The commission's action sends the Final EIR and the draft entitlements to the City Council for final action; the decision includes multiple mitigation measures that would be required as conditions if the council approves the project.