Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A <br />Page 98 <br /> <br />Page 25: tiThe amendment would not provide for additional residential development on existing and <br />proposed parcels beyond that already antidpated by the General Plan and existing R-2 zoning." <br /> <br />This Is a false statement, As detailed in the ILLEGAL PAST PRACTICE section, the highest density <br />alternative increases the maximum sIngle-family density from 8.7 family units per acre as specified In <br />both the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to 17.4 family units per acre. <br /> <br />Page 26: liThe project would permit a modest increase in residential densIty (less than one-half of one <br />unit) in areas already zoned for residential development." <br /> <br />There is Insuffident Information to validate the numerical results as detailed in the DENSITY ANALYSIS <br />NOT ADEQUATE section. <br /> <br />Page 26: "There would not be a substantial permanent increase In ambient noise levels in the project <br />vicinity above levels existing without the project, since the R-2 district is already development with <br />similar residential uses..." <br /> <br />This Is a false statement. R2 is not zoned for condos and apartments and the revision will permit <br />condos and apartments. The revision also Increases permItted density to 17.4 units per acre. Noise <br />impact needs to be analyzed for increase density and new permitted uses. <br /> <br />Page 28: "it would permit a slight (ncrease in density (less than one-half of one percent) tn R-2 zoned <br />parcels." <br /> <br />This 15'8 false ' statement. Even by the Initial Study incompiete and inadequate density analysis, the <br />projected density increase Is 5.2% not less than 0.5%. <br /> <br />This statement is misleading. The refereneed density increase is across all R-2 districts, while this <br />statement implies individual parcels will only see an increase of one-half of one percent. Actually <br />Individual parcels can see density increase to 17.4 units per acre. <br /> <br />Page 28: "However, any increase of residential density that would occur would be consistent with the <br />CIty's current practice and with the General Plan gUidelines for Medium Density Residential <br />development of 8-20 units per acre.n <br /> <br />This statement is misleading as detailed in the NOT CONSISTENT WITH PAST DEVELOPMENT section. <br /> <br />This is a misleading statement. The Initial Study should inform the public that the legality of City's <br />Interpretation has been challenged and may not be legal. <br /> <br />24 <br />