Staff Report 5.1

Analysis

Background

The City of Sonoma (City) has submitted an application requesting authorization of extension of water service through an Outside Service Area Agreement (OSAA) to the parcel located at 19764 Eighth Street East, Sonoma (Assessor’s Parcel Number 128-051-040). The owners of the parcel intend to construct a 74,500 square-foot mini-storage facility and have requested the extension of water from the City to service the fire suppression system, an employee restroom, and xeriscape landscaping.

The subject parcel is located southeast of the City and is outside of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), the Urban Service Area Boundary of the Sonoma County General Plan (USA) and Sphere Of Influence (SOI). It is not contiguous to the City boundary and is not eligible for annexation.

Many parcels in the area were connected to the City’s water system in the past. Staff has found some records showing that, as early as 1964, the City extended water service to parcels in the general vicinity of the subject parcel. The parcels adjacent to and north and east of the subject parcel are served by a water main that traverses the parcel. No records associated with the right to water of the subject parcel have been located.

The parcel is located within the boundary of the Schell-Vista Fire Protection District. The District Fire Chief has stated that it would be safer and more reliable to have the parcel’s fire systems and hydrants connected to the City’s water system.  

Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act (CKH) Compliance

Section 56133 of the CKH states that a city may provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundary and outside its sphere of influence to respond to an existing or impending threat to the health or safety of the public or the residents of the affected territory. However, service(s) that were extended by a city on or before January 1, 2001 are exempt from this section.

The City states that the fact the subject property is traversed by a City water main that was constructed prior to 1972 and that the surrounding properties are receiving City water service implies that the City agreed to provide water to the subject parcel. At the time that the water main was constructed, the City did not require documentation of such offers or agreements in City records. LAFCOs did not gain jurisdiction over the extension of the services outside an agency’s boundary, under state law, until 1994.

The City has stated that it has the water service capacity to serve the property and the proposed development and that the extension of the service meets City policy. The parcel is not located in the service area of any other city or district having the ability to provide the requested service.

 CEQA Compliance

In that the affected territory is located in unincorporated Sonoma County, the application for development was submitted to the County through Permit Sonoma. Acting as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the County prepared an Initial Study to assess the environmental impacts of the storage facility project and determined a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to be the appropriate level of environmental impact.

The Initial Study found that the project would have no impact or less than significant impact for all environmental factors except biological resources, air quality, utilities/service systems, and hydrology/water quality. The County found that the environmental impacts in these areas could be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of various mitigation measures. The County adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the mitigation measures stated in the Initial Study and Conditions of Approval.  

The Commission, as a responsible agency, has responsibility for mitigating or avoiding only the direct or indirect environmental effects of those parts of a project that it decides to carry out, finance, or approve. Staff finds that, with respect to the Commission’s responsibility, the Commission has jurisdiction only over the authorization of the extension of water service to the parcel. This authorization does not alter the jurisdiction of the County of Sonoma, which, as lead agency, has the power to implement the feasible alternatives or mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid the potentially significant environmental effects of the project.  

General Plan Consistency

Extension of services to the affected parcel has been determined to be inconsistent with provisions of the Sonoma County General Plan. While state law does not require that an OSAA be consistent with a county or city’s general plan, the Commission’s policy on OSAAs does make consistency with the Sonoma County General Plan a condition of approval.

At its discretion, the Commission may find that the circumstances of this application warrant an exception to its policy, find the extension of services appropriate and necessary, and waive the general plan consistency condition. 

Recommendation 

Staff notes that although there are no records indicating an offer of water service to this parcel when services were extended to the area decades ago, it could be inferred that an offer was made given service provision to all neighboring parcels within the small business park and the location of the water main, which traverses the subject parcel.

Although the Commission has not recognized extension of water services solely for fire suppression as a mitigation of an existing or impending threat to public health and safety, particularly for new development, it should be noted that fire suppression systems that are connected to municipal systems are considered far more reliable than alternate systems using water from wells, pressurizing equipment, and on-site storage.

The Commission could make a determination with regard to the “imputed” offer of water service prior to 2001, effectively exempting the proposal from the provisions of §56133, and granting an authorization of the OSAA. The Commission could further make an exception to its policy requiring that the OSAA be consistent with the Sonoma County General Plan.  

Should the Commission approve the application, staff will bring a resolution back to the Commission for review and consideration at its November meeting. 

Alternate Recommendation 

In the absence of documentary evidence of an intent or offer to provide water service prior to 2001, the Commission can determine that the provisions of §56133 apply and deny authorization of an OSAA.

Attachments 

1. Area Map of Neighborhood Indicating Parcels Receiving City Services.
2. Letters from Schell-Vista Fire Protection District
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration, Initial Study and Sonoma County Planning Commission Conditions of Approval.