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

Home Browse Search

Sextinger Farmhouse and Orchard Residential Development Project CEQA Findings Prevent further dilapidation of the site, discourage vandalism, break -ins, and unauthorized use of the site. C. REJECTION OF ALTERNATIVES In determining an appropriate range of alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR, a number of possible alternatives were considered and rejected. Alternatives were rejected because either they could not accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Project, would not have resulted in a reduction of potentially significant impacts, or were considered infeasible, The specific findings relating to the rejection of the considered alternatives are provided below. 1. No Build (No Project) Alternative Description: With no development, the site would continue to have impacts currently experienced on the site including vector infestation, vandalism, and safety issues including break -ins and fires from unauthorized uses. However, the project site would continue to have a General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential (LR -7) and zoning designation of Single Family Residential (R -1). The site would potentially be developed in accordance with the City's current land use and zoning on the property at some point in the future. (EIR, p. 7 -1.) Impacts: The No Build (No Project) Alternative would not result in any of the less than significant environmental impacts associated with the construction of the proposed project. Maintaining the project in its existing condition would avoid the less than significant aesthetics impacts, short -term construction air - quality and noise impacts, long -term future traffic impacts, and any impacts to presently unknown archaeological and paleontological artifacts onsite of the project as currently proposed. (EIR, p. 7 -1.) Objectives: The No Build (No Project) Alternative would fail to meet any of the four project objectives. It would fail to meet any existing or future housing need in the City. It would fail to provide new land uses that are consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations of low density residential. It would not provide land uses similar to surrounding uses, and the site may continue to experience vector infestation, vandalism, break -ins, and fires from unauthorized users. (EIR, p. 7 -1.) Finding_ The City Council hereby rejects the No Build (No Project) Alternative on the basis it fails to meet any of the four Project objectives. (EIR, p, 7-1.) 2. Original Project (Prior to Additional Analysis) Description: The original proposed project consisted of the development and construction of 24 new single - family residences on approximately five acres and demolition of the historic farmhouse and orchard. The original project would also have widened and improved the southern portion of East Santa Clara Avenue within the project frontage and provide a connection from Lyon Street south of the project site, north to East Santa Clara Avenue. The applicant has since changed the project from this proposed 24 -unit residential project to the currently proposed 23- unit (including one preserved in place unit) "Historic Preservation Alternative" prior to the final Planning Commission and City Council meetings. 38 "Exhibit A"