2014-060 - Adopting Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act

Home Browse Search

Sexlinger Farmhouse and Orchard Residential Development Project CEQA Findings Finding: Less Than Significant. (EIR, pp. 5 -60, 5 -61, 5 -62; January 2014 EIR Attachment, p. 8.) Analysis: The project would introduce 22 new single family residences and preserve in place one historic single family residence. According to the General Plan Housing Element the average size of households in the City is 4.7 persons. The Southern California Association of Governments has established a target goal for the City of new housing. While the City is not responsible for constructing this housing, it is required to identify sites within the City that would be suitable for housing development and to remove barriers to such construction. The project's residential units would serve to help the City meet its target for housing, however, when compared to the overall population of the City, the project would not induce substantial growth in population. Therefore, this impact is less than significant. (EIR, p. 5 -61; January 2014 EIR Attachment, p. 8,) K. PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Impact: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services including fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities? Finding: Less Than Significant. (EIR, pp. 5 -62, 5 -63; January 2014 EIR Attachment, p. 8.) Analysis: The increase of 22 new residences and the rehabilitation of an existing vacant residence will not increase demand for fire or police protection. The project would be required to contribute to the impacted school district with development impact fees for the proposed new residences. However, with compliance with existing regulations, no significant impacts on schools are anticipated. While the project will increase demand and use of Portola Park, this is not anticipated to be substantial enough to adversely impact the park. Therefore, these impacts are considered less than significant. (EIR, p, 5 -63; January 2014 EIR Attachment, p. 8.) L. RECREATION 1, Impact: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreation facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Finding: Less Than Significant. (EIR, pp. 5 -63, 5 -64; January 2014 EIR Attachment, p. 8,) Analysis: The project would result in an increased demand for recreation services and facilities, specifically in Portola Park, adjacent to the project site. However, the increase in demand resulting from 22 new residences is not anticipated to result in significant 17 "Exhibit A"