The Council will review the Notice of Preparation and the preparation of the draft EIR for the Shriners

By David M. Greenwald
Editor in Chief

Davis, CA – The Davis City Council should move forward with planning for the Shriners Property by authorizing staff to issue the Notice of Readiness (NOP) for the Shriners Property Project Proposal for public review and comment, begin the draft EIR process, and appoint a council subcommittee to work with staff as the application moves forward.

On June 13, 2023, the applicant submitted the Shriners Property Project Proposal. The project is proposed for 232.4 north of Covell and east of Wildhorse and the proposed Palomino Project. It would generate 1,200 housing units and would be subject to a Measure J ballot, which is expected to go before voters in 2026.

Among the project’s objectives is to “provide a significant number of essential housing units for the city, in a wide variety and balance in terms of densities, products and prices.”

The plan is to provide 20% of the total residential units as “Capital A” affordable housing for low, very low and extremely low income households.

Additionally, they plan to “provide an additional 10% of total residential units for single-family homes priced at 70% of the median home price in Davis” and to “prioritize the use of high- and medium-density housing for the missing middle- and young-income families who currently cannot find or afford housing in Davis.”

Finally, they seek to “create the type of housing that will encourage young families to buy and live in Davis, thereby increasing the number of children attending DJUSD schools.”

At the January 9, 2024 City Council meeting, the Council awarded the contract for the preparation of an EIR for the Shriners Property Proposal to Raney Planning & Management, Inc.

The Council then directed staff to draft the NOP and refer it back to the Council for further direction before proceeding with the start of the public review period of the NOP as the next step in the environmental review of the project.

According to the staff report, if the Council orders the publication of the NOP, the comment period will begin on Friday, July 12, 2024 and end on Monday, August 12, 2024 at 5:00 p.m.

The City will accept written comments from any interested organization or member of the public at any time during this period.

A framework meeting will take place on Thursday, July 25, starting at 6:30 p.m. in the Valente room of the senior center.

According to staff, “the purpose of the meeting is to gather views and comments from government agencies and the general public on the proposed scope of the analysis to be conducted to prepare the draft EIR. This meeting is expected to be an open house and interested parties will be able to drop by to review the proposed draft documents and/or submit written comments.”

Representatives from the City of Davis, the EIR consultant and the applicant would be “available to answer questions regarding the proposal and the EIR process.”

Under CEQA, the EIR is required to analyze a “reasonable range” of alternative projects that could potentially have one or more lesser environmental impacts than the proposed project.

Staff notes that “CEQA also requires analysis of a ‘no project’ alternative to compare the impacts of the proposed project with those of no project.”

While the Raney contract included the evaluation of seven alternatives, all at a qualitative level of analysis, staff notes that “the City Council asked the Village Farms Davis project to use an approach of analyzing fewer alternatives, but including a more in-depth analysis of a few of them, to allow for a more nuanced understanding of potential impacts, particularly with respect to traffic and greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts.”

Based on this, staff recommends analysis of five project alternatives for the Shriners.

Staff adds: “The key factor at this stage of initiating EIR preparation is to ensure that the full scope and capabilities of the project are incorporated into the EIR analysis.”

Further, they note: “A project proposal can always “reduce” its size/scope/impact after an EIR is launched, but it can be problematic to try to “expand” the size/scope/impact of a project subsequently without triggering the redistribution of the EIR and/or the preparation of a subsequent EIR or addendum.”