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

Home Browse Search

Sexlinger Farmhouse and Orchard Residential Development project GEQA Findings Findings: The City Council hereby rejects the Alternate Location alterative on the basis that (1) none of the locations are feasible for a single family residential development of more than one unit; and (2) this Alternative fails to meet three of the four project objectives. 4. Park Expansion Alternative Description: This alternative would remove all existing uses on the site and replace them with public uses consistent with the expansion of Portola Park. This alternative would require the rezoning of the project site to Open Space (0) designation. (EIR, p. 7 -3.) Impacts: This alternative would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to cultural resources, associated with the demolition and removal of the existing residential structures, However, this alternative would reduce long term operational impacts related to traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and hydrology and water quality impacts associated with impervious surfaces, (EIR, pp. 7 -3 through 7 -6) Remaining impacts would be similar to those of the proposed project, Obiectives: This alternative would not provide for the current and future "move -up" housing needs in the City, or provide land uses that are consistent with the LR -7 and R -1 land use designations. However, this alternative would meet the project objectives related to providing land uses that are visually cohesive and that would prevent further dilapidation of the project site. Findine: The City Council hereby rejects this alternative on grounds that: (1) it would result in significant and unavoidable cultural resources impacts; and (2) it would meet only two of the project's four objectives. 5. Urban Garden Alternative Description: This alternative would develop the project site with an urban garden, museum, and education facility with an orange grove on five acres of the project site. Impacts: This alternative has the potential to result in increased impacts related to land use and planning, as a museum and education facility use would be inconsistent with the project site's current residential zoning designation. (EIR, p. 7 -8.) This alternative may also result in the potential for increased operational noise impacts, related to visitors using the project's facilities, which would be located next to residential uses. Similarly, traffic and parking impacts may be increased, due to the need to provide visitor parking at the site, and visitor traffic, (EIR, pp. 7 -8, 9.) Depending on the scope of renovations made to the historic structures on the project site, there could be increased impacts to cultural resources, (EIR, p. 7 -7.) Obiectives: This alternative would not meet the objectives of the project to provide move -up housing in the City, or land uses that are consistent with the existing residential zoning. In addition, a museum and educational facility is not compatible with adjacent residential uses. However, the alternative would be the fourth project objective, of preventing further dilapidation of the project site. (EIR, p. 7 -9, 7 -10.) 40 "Exhibit A"