SSU Master Plan Revision

Music Center Comments and Responses

1. This page provides insufficient documentation to make intelligent and informed comment on the relationships between the Music Center and the proposed Master Plan Revision.

• Response: What additional types of information would be useful?

2. The North Entrance is inadequate for the expected maximum traffic flow. With 10,000 people attending a concert on the lawn and in the main performance hall, ingress and egress will be extremely important. Strongly recommend that a design similar to the 2-lane (per direction) boulevard of the South Entrance be utilized.

3. Concerned about the vast amount of land consumed by the open parking lot. The alternative of a parking garage, which obviously increases cost but substantially saves land, should be considered.

• Response: The cost of constructing a parking space in a parking structure is approximately six times that of providing a space in a surface lot. Thus, parking structures are typically used only when there is no surface area left.

4. Must the berms planned for the site, shielding the Music Center from Petaluma Hill Road and Rohnert Park Expressway, be so large?

• Response: Berms intended to shield the Music Center from noise and visual distractions from Petaluma Hill Road and Rohnert Park Expressway are proposed. There berms gradually rise by a slope of five percent to a height of approximately twelve feet. They will be landscaped in a manner characteristic of the region, with grapevines currently being proposed (see comment #5). The precise height will be determined during the design stage of the Music Center itself.

5. Are the grapevines proposed adjacent to the Music Center really appropriate given the agricultural history of the Rancho Cotati area? (Grapes have a long history in Sonoma County, going back to the mission period. But there is NO history of such activity here.) (Another comment asked for more description of these proposed "agricultural zones.")

6. The proposed extensive use of non-indigenous olive trees to the exclusion of such indigenous trees as California and Live Oak, Toyon, Buckeye, Madrone, Manzanita, and the rather obvious Redwood should be considered.

7. For the Music Center to be successful, noise from surrounding areas should be carefully considered and addressed. For example, have the noise impacts of Rohnert Park Expressway, Petaluma Hill Road, and the inevitable build out of the land north of the Expressway, been adequately taken into account? Likewise, has consideration been given to the very real possibility that the current agricultural zoning east of Petaluma Hill Road will eventually be changed to residential or mixed use, at fairly high densities?

• Response: See Response to Comment 4.

8. Be sure that the Music Center does not intrude on the riparian corridor of Copeland Creek. Response: Phil Northen, Chair of the SSU Biology Department, proposes that biologists in that Department be brought into the planning process at the point where the specific site plan and creek setback are being established. When will the site plan and creek setback be established?

9. The entire Music Center complex should be pushed north toward Rohnert Park Expressway, leaving an area for natural habitat restoration on the level land north of the Creek.

• Response: This comment comes from Phil Northen, Chair of the SSU Biology Department and experienced in environmental planning and analysis. What other on- and off-campus resources could be brought to bear in addressing issues concerning Copeland Creek?

10. What types of events are planned for the Music Center?

• Response: The program is still being developed, but under discussion is a combination of Santa Rosa Symphony concerts, performances by University Performing Arts ensembles, and other University events. Anticipated is a summer festival including a Santa Rosa Symphony Pops Concert and perhaps six medium sized concerts. The facility can also be used for lectures, meetings, and concerts.

11. Will the design of the Music Center be cohesive with the current campus buildings, or will it change the look of the campus? How/when will new building design be determined?

• Response: Landscaping can be used to promote cohesiveness in campus design, even if individual buildings are of different styles. Once a Master Plan Revision is approved, an architectural firm will be hired to complete the design of the Music Center. They will work with a campus task force to establish design details. Establishing the final design requires approval by the Campus Planning Committee and, finally, by the CSU Board of Trustees.

12. Will there be a transit stop for the Music Center?

• Response: A transit stop is anticipated.

13. With two existing 500 seat theaters within less than a mile of each other we now cluster a third.

a. How will the facility make use of the RP Community Center Facilities for community outreach?
b. How will Person Theater be integrated?

14. The current design makes the new complex a "monument." Its location is not "on" campus, but next to it. As a summer music institute, where will the participants stay to create a full community center for music.

a. How will you make it a campus facility?
b. How will you integrate in community housing?
c. For less capital expenditure, given the location, would it not be better to develop the Marconi Center in Marshall and the Synanon Ranch as more appropriate and effective sites?
d. How will the Community Colleges be involved and other campuses, (e.g. San Joaquin Delta College and the University of the Pacific)?

15. Having served on the founding board for the Luther Burbank Center, I learned early that Performing Arts Centers do not pay for themselves.

a. How will the center impact on the SSU instructional budgets?
b. Does the $41 million cover the cost of an endowment to operate the Center?
c. What % of its take will the SR Symphony contribute to maintaining the facility?

16. I am concerned about two of the issues raised regarding the Music Center. They both pertain to the proposed Music Center's location.

a. Please define the agricultural zones defined in Issue 2.
b. What kind of steps will be taken to insure that the integrity of Copeland Creek will not be negatively impacted by the campus expansion?

17. Make sure that any bridges or pathways near Copeland Creek do not endanger its riparian habitat. Transplant or replace any plant life that must be removed. Will construction have any consequences to the Creek downstream?

18. Why is the new music/performing arts facility across campus instead of near Ives (i.e., why not keep all facilities of this type near one another)?

19. I'm concerned about the impact on Copeland Creek as well as the adjacent trail. Please make every effort to avoid disturbing surrounding plant & animal life.

20. Preliminary design does not appear to address the fact the we have our primary vehicle artery running through what will be a significant pedestrian crossing (folks moving from the Music Center parking lot to the Music Center). Some way of allowing pedestrian traffic to cross below (tunnel) or over (bridge) the road should be built into the next design.

21. I hope a significant effort will be made to enhance Copeland Creek.

22. You should consider options for off-campus parking for Music Center events (e.g., the Caltrans park-and-ride lots), with a shuttle service to campus, to offset the traffic impact on RP Expressway.

23. What is the maximum capacity for Music Center events? How often do you expect to reach that capacity? What will be the problems associated with traffic and parking for these events?

24. Explore the worst case scenarios as far as the traffic impact on the surrounding communities.

25. I hope you are planning on a recording studio facility in the new music center. Are there plans for one?

Return to the Comments and Responses to Comments page.

Return to the Music Center page.