HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 56-2000RESOLUTION NO. 56-2000
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO CERTIFY THE FOCUSED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR OAK FARMS (EIR 99-06?)
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation was prepared in November 1999, and mailed
to responsible public agencies; and,
WHEREAS, a draft Focused Environmental Impact Report (Focused DEIR) dated
February 2000 was prepared for the project pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and a Notice of Completion was filed with the State
Clearinghouse (SCH# 1999112038); and,
WHEREAS, the Focused DEIR was circulated for a 45-day review period
beginning on March 1, 2000 and ending on April 14, 2000. Public notice of the
availability of the Focused DEIR was published in a newspaper of general circulation and
mailed to agencies and all persons who had requested notification; and,
WHEREAS, a Final Focused Environmental Impact Report (Final Focused EIR)
dated April 21, 2000 has been prepared which includes responses to all comments
received during the public review period. Notice of the availability of the Final Focused
EIRwas published in a newspaper of general circulation on May 10, 2000, and mailed to
the two commenting bodies and agencies;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution # 2554 recommending
certification of the DEIR/FEIR to the City Council at their regularly scheduled and
noticed public hearing on May 4, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed certification hearing on the
document on May 24, 2000; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, as contained in the
attached Exhibit A, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and
certifies the Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Oak Farms Residential
Project.
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City
of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on 24th day of May , 2000 by the
following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Eugene R. Mullin and John R. Penna, Mayor Pro Tem
Joseph A. Fernekes and Mayor Karyl Matsumoto
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
ATTEST:
lerk
Exhibit A
OAK FARMS RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
Findings of Fact
and
Statement of Overriding Consideration
Pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA
Guidelines and Section 21081.6 of the
Public Resources Code
Related Environmental Documentation
Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports
(State Clearinghouse Number 199112038)
Date of Adoption by City of South San Francisco
Project Files May Be Reviewed At:
City of South San Francisco
Department of Economic and Community Development
Planning Division
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco 94083
May, 2000
Section 1 Introduction and Purpose
A 33 lot subdivision is planned to be located at the south east corner of Oak Avenue and
Grand Avenue. The project would create 32 new single-family homes on a 2.65 acre site.
There is a triplex at the northeastern comer of the property which would be retained, thus
resulting in a 33 lot subdivision.
There is an existing two-story single-family structure located on the western portion of
the site which would be demolished. The site also includes a pump house, wooden water
tank and storage shed which would also be demolished. The Lux Barn, also on the site,
would be demolished.
The purposes of the project include:
To achieve an environment reflecting a higher-level of attention for Urban
Design, Small Town Community, Architectural Design and Land Use
principles.
To develop a housing type that is more affordable to various segments of the
community in a manner consistent with the housing needs as identified by the
Bay Area Association of Governments (ABAG).
· To provide parking within the development thereby not impacting the existing
neighborhood.
To facilitate a higher and better use of the site through a unique layout and
design with a common walkway (open space) to create a sense of small town
(Old South San Francisco) environment.
Reducing the jobs-housing imbalance identified in the City's recently adopted
updated General Plan (October 1999) by providing more housing
opportunities in South San Francisco within close proximity (3/4 mile) of the
under-construction Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) line.
This document presents findings that must be made by the City prior to approval of the
project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section
21081 of the Public Resources Code. Under CEQA the City is required to make written
findings explaining how it has dealt with each alternative and each significant
environmental impact identified in the draft Focused Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) and the final Focused Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (City of South San
Francisco February 25, 2000 and April 21, 2000), collectively referred to herein as the
"EIR." The City may find that:
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified
in the EIR;
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 1. Introduction
and Purpose
May, 2000
Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency, and not the agency making the findings, and have been
or can and should be adopted by that other agency; or,
· Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the
administrative record. Evidence from the DEIR, FEIR, the City's General Plan
and the project files for this project located at the South San Francisco Planning
Division is used to meet these criteria.
This document summarizes the significant environmental impacts of the project
and the project alternatives, and describes how these are to be mitigated.
This document is divided into the following seven sections:
Section 1 Introduction and Purpose;
Section 2 Findings on the Project Alternatives Considered in the EIR;
Section 3
Findings on Significant Impacts of the Proposed Project Identified
in the EIR;
Section 4 Mitigation Measures for Less-Than-Significant Impacts;
Section 5
Implementation Schedule and Checklist for Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting;
Section 6 Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
Section 7 Citations.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 1. Introduction
and Purpose
May, 2000
Section 2 Findings on Project Alternatives Considered in the EIR
ALTERNATIVE 1 NO-PROJECT
The No-Project Alternative would not develop new housing and would leave the
barn in its current state. The Lux Barn would continue in its deteriorated condition.
The building has extensive dry-rot and termite and rodent infestation and does not
meet the minimum requirements of the Uniform Building Code for structural
soundness or habitability. The Lux Barn would continue to deteriorate and
eventually would be lost.
Finding: No-Project Alternative Infeasible
The no-project alternative would not result in saving the Lux Barn. It is not the project
that is causing its deterioration, but the lack of maintenance.
The No-Project Alternative is infeasible because it would not achieve the goals and
objectives of the project.. The No-Project Alternative would not achieve the social and
economic goals of the project to (1) Develop a housing type that is more affordable to
the various segments of the community in a manner consistent with the housing needs as
identified by the Bay Area Association of Governments (AGAG) and (2) Reduce the
jobs-housing imbalance identified in the City's General Plan (October 1999) by
providing more housing opportunities within close (3/4 mile) proximity of the under-
construction Bay Area Rapid Transit District line.
The No-Project Alternative would not meet the City's General Plan goals of providing
housing (up to 30 dwelling units per acre) on the site. The No-Project Alternative would
not meet the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Plan land use designation which is also
residential up to 30 dwelling units per acre. The No-Project Alternative would not meet
the affordability requirements of California Redevelopment Law wherein 15% (applied to
the project, five units) of the housing units must be below market rate. The No-Project
Alternative would not provide the opportunity for the "First-Time Homebuyer" program
(Program) that is proposed as part of the project. The Program and its requirements
would be entered into by a Development Agreement between the Developer and the City
and would require the present and future sales of the five homes to be reserved to below
market rate. Therefore, the City will not pursue this alternative
ALTERNATIVE 2-REDUCED PROJECT DENSITY
AND RETENTION AND RESTORATION OF THE BARN ON THE SITE
Th reduced-density alternative assumes that the Lux Barn would be retained on the site
and rehabilitated and that the project would be reduced in density (by 10 to12 units) and
redesigned in order to accommodate inclusion of the Lux Barn and limited farming on the
site. Restoration costs would cost upwards of $1,000,000 (rehabilitation, restoration and
architectural and design fees). Land costs are not included in this estimate.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
6
Section 2. Findings on Project Alternatives
Considered in the EIR
May, 2000
Finding: Reduced Density Alternative Infeasible
The loss of 10 to 12 units of housing would likely render the project economically
infeasible. The Reduced-Project Alternative would not achieve the social and economic
goals of the project to: (1) Develop a housing type that is more affordable to the various
segments of the community in a manner consistent with the housing needs as identified
by the Bay Area Association of Governments (AGAG) and (2) Reduce the jobs-housing
imbalance identified in the City's General Plan (October 1999) by providing more
housing opportunities within close (3/4 mile) proximity of the under-construction Bay
Area Rapid Transit District line.
Additionally, the City Attorney's Office has opined that there is not a nexus to require as
a mitigation measure or condition of approval the restoration of the Lux Barn as the costs
of such a condition or mitigation measure do not meet the test of proportionality. The
ability of the City to meet its economic and housing redevelopment objectives contained
in the E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Plan and the housing objectives contained in
the General Plan would be jeopardized. Therefore, the City will not pursue this
alternative.
ALTERNATIVE 3-INCREASED DENSITY AND
RETENTION AND RESTORATION OF THE BARN ON THE SITE
This alternative assumes that the Lux Barn would be retained on the site and rehabilitated
and that the project would be increased to 80 units (six-story structure) in density and be
constructed as an apartment complex or townhomes for purchase. The rehabilitation
costs would be the same as that identified for the reduced project, approximately
$1,000,000, not including the costs of the land.
Finding: Increased Density Alternative Infeasible
The increased density alternative would result in an increase of impacts over that of the
proposed project. The secondary impacts associated with this alternative include visual
impacts as the size and height of the structure would be out of scale with the
neighborhood. There may be a loss of light to the single-family one- and two-story
structures along the southern property line of the site. A rezoning to R-3 multi-family
residential would be required as well as a variance to the height restrictions.
Additionally, this alternative would not meet the following objectives of the project: (1)
To achieve an environment reflecting a higher-level of attention for Urban Design, Small
Town Community, Architectural Design and Land Use principles and, (2) To facilitate a
higher and better use of the site through a unique layout and design with a common
walkway (open space) to create a sense of small town (Old South San Francisco).
Therefore, the City will not pursue this alternative.
Again, the City Attorney's Office has opined that there is not a nexus to require as a
mitigation measure or condition of approval the restoration of the Lux Barn as the costs
of such a condition or mitigation measure do not meet the test of proportionality.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 2. Findings on Project Alternatives
Considered in the EIR
May, 2000
Section 3
Findings on Significant Impacts of the Proposed Project Identified
in the EIR
This section identifies the findings of significant impacts of the project, as identified in
the EIR.
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.1.A: Relocation and rehabilitation of the Lux Barn would result in a
significant impact to the historic resource in terms of the context of small-scale
farming under all three impact criterion.
Mitigation Measure 3.1.A
Move the Barn to Orange Park, historically rehabilitate the Lux Barn to the 1854 use as a
carriage house and place an historical plaque at the project site at Oak Avenue.
Level of Significance after Mitigation
Full restoration and rehabilitation of the Barn would result in a less-than-significant
impact to the structure with respect to its original use as a carriage house and a structure
that dates to 1850's. Relocating the Barn to Orange Park would still result in a significant
impact with respect to the loss of the context of small-scale farming in South San
Francisco.
Mitigation Measure 3.1.A-Alternative
Move the Barn to Orange Park and rehabilitate the Lux Barn (but not to the extent of the
historic rehabilitation identified in Mitigation Measure 3.1.A) and place an historical
plaque at the project site at Oak Avenue.
Level of Significance after Mitigation
Full implementation of mitigation measure would still result in a significant impact to the
historic significance of the structure due to the compromises that would be made in the
restoration in order to keep the restoration costs down and due to the loss of the context
of small-scale farnfing.
Finding: Mitigation Measure 3.1.A and 3.1.A-Alternative Not Feasible. Full historic
restoration of the Lux Barn can not be levied on the developer because a degree of
proportionality does not exist between the cost of the mitigation measure and the project
impacts. Anything less than a full-scale restoration would still result in a significant
unavoidable impact to the Barn. The loss of small-scale farming would remain a
significant unavoidable impact under both mitigation alternatives. Secondary impacts
could occur at Orange Park with implementation of the mitigation measure which
includes the: Loss of recreation area; Loss of landscaping to create an area to place the
Barn; and Public safety and security issues with respect to potential vandalism or
personal injury. Impact 3.1.A requires a Statement and Finding of Overriding
Considerations.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 3. Findings on Significant Impacts of the
Proposed Project Identified in the EIR
May, 2000
Impact 3.1.B: Demolition of the Lux Barn would result in a significant impact to the
historic resource in terms of the date of the structure (1850's), its association with
the Lux Mansion under all three impact criterion and its context with small-scale
farming.
In order to construct the project as proposed, the Lux Barn would be demolished.
Demolishing the Barn would remove the structure from our culture.
Mitigation Measure 3.1.B
Drafting floor plans of the Barn, taking photographs of the Barn and archiving this
information in the history room of the library would preserve documentation of the Barn.
Removing some of the architectural features such as doors, wood, cabinetry and/or
molding from the building prior to demolition, and donating the pieces to the historic
museum would preserve aspects of the Barn. Documentation of the Barn could also
include documentation of small-scale farming in South San Francisco including the
farming activities on the site and the Uccelli farming.
Level of Significance after Mitigation
Documentation and preservation of the historic features of the Barn is a practice of
historic preservation used by the U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service.
This mitigation measure, however, would not reduce project impacts to a less than
significant level to both the Barn as a structure dating to the 1850's associated with the
Lux Mansion and the context of the small-scale farming.
Finding: Mitigation Measure 3.1.A Feasible
Documentation and archival of the Lux Barn and its context with small-scale farming is
feasible. A Finding of Overriding Considerations would still be required however, as the
impact would not be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 3.l.B-Alternative
The Barn could be disassembled, by use of volunteer community labor, carefully marked
and stored for reassembly at a later date. The Barn could be relocated and reconstructed
when a receiver site is identified. During disassembly the Barn could be treated for
termites and dry rot to arrest the deterioration of the structure. Photographs should be
taken of the site with respect to small-scale farming. All efforts should be made to locate
a receiver site with agricultural uses, and barring that, photographs of the current site and
photographs of any Uccelli farming, should be displayed in the Barn upon reconstruction.
Level of Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of this mitigation measure would not reduce project impacts to the
structure to a less-than significant level, due to the compromises in renovation necessary
to keep the project costs down. The loss of the context of small scale-farming would still
remain a significant unavoidable impact
Finding: Mitigation Measure 3.1.B-Alternative Not Feasible. The mitigation measure
would not reduce the project impacts to a less-than-significant level. The loss of time to
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 3. Findings on Significant Impacts of the
Proposed Project Identified in the EIR
May, 2000
assemble a volunteer labor force to disassemble the Lux Barn, the costs of storing the
Barn, and insurance for the Lux Barn would all add to project costs.
The presence of asbestos and the potential liability to volunteers with respect to handling
the asbestos would be a secondary safety impact, Liability for volunteer workers may
also need to be considered especially with respect to asbestos exposure. A Finding of
Overriding Consideration pursuant to CEQA would still be required for the impacts to
both the structure dating to the 1850's associated with the Lux Mansion and small-scale
farming in South San Francisco.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
10
Section 3. Findings on Significant Impacts of the
Proposed Project Identified in the EIR
May, 2000
' ' Section 4 Mitigation Measures for Less-Than-Significant Impacts
This section identifies the findings on less-than-significant impacts of the project, as
identified in the EIR.
There were no impacts identified in the Oak Farms EIR that were less-than-significant.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
Section 4. Findings on Less-Than-Significant Impacts
of the Proposed Project Identified in the EIR
11 May, 2000
Section 5 Implementation Schedule and Checklist for Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
This section contains a description of the required mitigation measure. Both impacts are listed, and both require Findings of
Overriding Considerations.
IMPACT MITIGATION
Impact 3.1-A. Relocation and
rehabilitation of the Lux Barn
would result in a significant
impact to the historic resource in
terms of the context of small-
scale farming under all three
impact criterion. (Significant-
Unavoidable).
Move the Barn to Orange Park,
historically rehabilitate the Lux Barn
to the 1854 use as a carriage house and
place an historical plaque at the project
site at Oak Avenue.
Alternative
Move the Barn to Orange Park or
some other location and rehabilitate the
Lux Barn, to a lesser extent than
identified above and place an historical
plaque at the project site at Oak
Avenue. The Barn would be
rehabilitated at a minimum extent to
slow or prevent its decay and extensive
historical restoration would not occur.
The Barn would be restored to the
historical use of storage, with a less-
exacting replication of original
building materials, and without the
need to rehabilitate to current-day
occupancy standards
IMPLEMENTED WHEN MONITORED LEVEL OF
BY IMPLEMENTED BY SIGNIFICANCE
N/A N/A City Council Adopt Significant
a Finding of Unavoidable
Overriding
Consideration.
Mitigation Measure
is infeasible.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
12
Section 5. Implementation Schedule and Checklist
for Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
May, 2000
IMPACT
Impact 3.1-B. Demolition of the
Lux Barn would result in a
significant impact to the historic
resource in terms of the date of
the structure (1850's) and its
association with the Lux
Mansion under all three impact
criterion. (Significant
Unavoidable).
MITIGATION
Document and archive the Barn and its
context with respect to small-scale
farming with photographs and floor
plans prior to demolition. Preserve
some architectural features of the Barn
and display them at the history
museum. Documentation of the Barn
and the site would be in-keeping with
General Plan Policy Guiding Policy
7.5-G-2 which states encourages
municipal and community awareness,
appreciation, and support for South
San Francisco's historic, cultural, and
archaeological resources.
IMPLEMENTED
BY
Developer to pay for
architectural services
for documentation
· WHEN
IMPLEMENTED
Prior to demolition
permit being issued by
the City for demolition
of any structure on the
site
MONITORED
BY
City Council.
Building and
Planning.
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Significant.
Requires City
Override and
Statement of
Overriding
Consideration
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
13
Section 5. Implementation Schedule and Checklist
for Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
May, 2000
Section 6 Statement of Overriding Considerations
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the applicable economic, legal,
social, technological or other benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered
"acceptable" (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a)). However CEQA requires the
agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering the project acceptable
when specific impacts are infeasible to mitigate. Such reasons must be based on
substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093(b)). The agency's statement is referred to as a "Statement of
Overriding Considerations".
The City of South San Francisco is proposing to approve the Oak Farms Residential
Subdivision project and has prepared and certified a DEIR/FEIR that satisfies the
requirements of CEQA. The following adverse impacts of the project are considered
significant and unavoidable, based on the DEIR, FEIR and findings discussed previously
in Sections 2 and 3 of this document:
Impact 3.1.A: Relocation and rehabilitation of the Lux Barn would result in a
significant impact to the historic resource in terms of the context of small-scale
farming under all three impact criterion.
Impact 3.1.B: Demolition of the Lux Barn would result in a significant impact to the
historic resource in terms of the date of the structure (1850's), its association with the
Lux Mansion under all three impact criterion and its context with small-scale farming
The City finds that the social, environmental, and economic considerations of the
proposed Oak Farms Residential Subdivision project outweigh the foregoing,
unavoidable environmental impacts for the reasons stated below. In making this finding,
the City has balanced the applicable, social, legal, environmental, economic and other
benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts and has
indicated its willingness to accept the resulting risk.
The Land Use and Housing Element of the City's General Plan recognizes the
importance of reducing the "jobs/housing imbalance". The proposed project would
provide 32 new single family residential units within ~ mile of the now under-
construction Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Line. The location of the project with
respect to BART as well as the E1 Camino Corridor, less than a quarter mile away,
provides housing within a transit and service area. The addition of the 32 units of
housing would assist the City in meeting its regional fair share of housing needs as
established by the Bay Area Association of Governments (ABAG).
The E1 Camino Corridor Redevelopment Plan (Plan) also identifies the project site as one
requisite to provide housing. The provision of in-fill housing would provide five below
market rate units and a first time homebuyer program that would insure the unit's
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
14
Section 6. Statement of Overriding
Considerations
May, 2000
affordability for the life of the project. The project would also assist in alleviating blight
in the Plan Area.
Housing/Social Benefits: The project would be a source of housing including providing
five affordable housing opportunities. The addition of the 32 units of housing would
assist the City in meeting its regional fair share of housing needs as established by
ABAG.
Community Benefits: The project would assist in alleviating blight in the Plan Area.
Land Use Benefits: The project would provide for residential development that is
identified in and consistent with the City's General and Redevelopment Plans which is
within close proximity to the under-construction BART line and the E1 Camino Corridor
transit and service corridor.
Environmental Benefits: The project itself is not contributing to the deterioration of the
Lux Barn. The Lux Barn is deteriorating as a result of dry-rot, termite and rodent
infestation and as it currently exists does not meet the minimum requirements under the
Uniform Building Code for safety or habitability. The project would necessitate the
demolition or removal of the Barn. Demolition of the Barn would result in its loss sooner
that existing conditions which will result in its eventual loss due to lack of maintenance.
As required in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, prior to demolition the
Lux Barn would be fully documented with floor plans and elevations. The
documentation, along with any significant building elements that can be salvaged, would
be required to be archived with the Historic Museum. Therefore, the proposed project as
mitigated would result in documenting and archiving the history and physical elements of
the Barn.
Economic Benefits: The project would increase property tax revenues on site and in the
project area.
The Oak Farms Residential Subdivision provides a beneficial mix of land use,
development, housing, environmental and economic benefits which outweighs the
unavoidable environmental impact. Therefore, the City has adopted the Statement of
Overriding Considerations.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
15
Section 6. Statement of Overriding
Considerations
May, 2000
Section 7 Citations
PRINTED REFERENCES
City of South San Francisco General Plan, October 1999.
City of South San Francisco El Camino Corridor Redevelopment Plan, June 1993 as
amended.
Draft and Final Focused Environmental Impact Report-Oak Farms, April 21, 2000.
Environmental Consultant: Allison Knapp, Planning, Redevelopment and Environmental
Consulting, San Francisco, CA
City of South San Francisco Planning Commission Staff Report, May 4, 2000.
Oak Farms Residential Subdivision
Findings of Fact Statement of
Overriding Considerations
16
Section 6. Statement of Overriding
Considerations
May, 2000