Parallels: 'Town Gossip' and Flanders Mansion

ABSTRACT: Parallels between the Monterey History and Art Association's "Town Gossip," a 1920 oil painting by Monterey artist Euphemia Charlton Fortune. and the Flanders Mansion are presented. QUESTIONS are asked of The Monterey County Herald Editorial Board.

In a recent editorial and article about the Monterey History and Art Association’s 1920 oil painting by well-known Monterey artist Euphemia Charlton Fortune entitled “Town Gossip,” The Monterey County Herald reported that the painting was to be auctioned by John Moran Auctioneers, Inc. of Altadena, CA. on February 17, 2009, until the Association Board convened a special session and its members agreed to negotiate with Moran Auctioneers to have the artwork recalled, along with five other paintings.

Striking parallels between “Town Gossip” and the Flanders Mansion, including, as follows:

• “Town Gossip,” is a “signature painting by a world-famous Peninsula artist,” according to The Monterey County Herald. The English Cottage Tudor Revival Flanders Mansion is described in historic preservation documents as “a remarkable example of Gutterson’s mature work” and represents “the only know example of cavity wall construction in the region.”

• Regarding “Town Gossip,” The Monterey County Herald’s editorial stated, “the importance of the piece and its strong local connections — the artist as well as the Monterey setting — weigh strongly in favor of keeping it in place.” Similarly, Flanders Mansion is important, due to it being listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and has strong local connections, due to its being built by Paul Flanders and historically being an integral part of Mission Trail Nature Preserve since the formation of the city’s largest park in the early 1970s.

• The Monterey County Herald’s article on “Town Gossip” quoted Monterey History and Art Association board member Brian Call as stating that “no fiduciary emergency occurred that required the sale of its assets.” Similarly, regarding Flanders Mansion, there is no fiduciary emergency requiring the sale of the Flanders Mansion property.

• Quoted in The Monterey County Herald was Erin Smith, a grandniece of Fortune, who stated, the painting "should be part of the community, not someone's private collection." And Fortune’s nephew, James R. Fortune stated "It's not just a painting, but a part of Monterey they're giving away. Someone who was here, who's saying this is what it looked like. It's linked to a plethora of things involving the history of Monterey. It would be a shame to have it disappear." Similarly, the Flanders Mansion should remain a part of the community and it is more than just a building that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would be giving away, it represents a part of Carmel-by-the-Sea and therefore it would be a shame to have it sold into private ownership.

• The Monterey County Herald’s Editorial Board implored the Monterey History and Art Association to “reconsider its unfortunate decision to put the piece on the block.” They hoped that “this charming and important work can remain in our midst.” They implored the Association to “explore every way possible to keep ‘Town Gossip’ in the town where it belongs.” And finally, the title tellingly stated, “A shame to lose local artist's star painting.”

QUESTIONS: If and when a majority of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council Members vote to sell the Flanders Mansion Property, will The Monterey County Herald Editorial Board view the Flanders Mansion in the same manner they view artist Euphemia Charlton Fortune’s “Town Gossip” oil painting? Will the Editorial Board conclude that it would be a “shame” to lose a National Register of Historic Places historic resource, that the Flanders Mansion should remain “where it belongs,” in the public domain? Will the Editorial Board implore the City Council to “reconsider its unfortunate decision” to sell the Flanders Mansion Property?

(Sources: A shame to lose local artist's star painting, THE HERALD'S VIEW, The Monterey County Herald, 01/30/2009 and Board unaware of painting's pending sale, Negotiations under way to recall five artworks from auction, KEVIN HOWE, Herald Staff Writer, 01/31/2009)

COMMENTARY The Superior Alternative: Lease the Flanders Mansion to the Flanders Foundation

Since its formation as a non-profit organization in 1999, the Flanders Foundation, an organization dedicated to restoring, enhancing and maintaining “the Flanders Mansion property in the public domain as a historical, cultural and educational resource for the benefit of the community,” has repeatedly contacted the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea for the express purpose of discussing a public-private partnership for the long-term “low-intensity” public use of the Flanders Mansion. Yet, despite the Flanders Foundation having a business plan, operating plan, marketing plan, financial plan and the support of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the State Office of Historic Preservation, Mayor Sue McCloud has obstinately refused to meet with members of the Flanders Foundation to discuss a public-private partnership for the Flanders Mansion. To wit, Mayor Sue McCloud has placed her own personal, misguided agenda of selling the Flanders Mansion ahead of her duty and responsibility as mayor of treating the city-owned National Register of Historic Places Flanders Mansion as an inheritance to be passed on to another generation of Carmelites in a better state than when she assumed stewardship of the Flanders Mansion in 2000.

Moreover, in the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property (RDEIR), the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea identified one primary objective and six secondary objectives, as follows:

The primary purpose of the proposed sale is “to divest the City of the Flanders Mansion Property which is in need of significant short-term and long-term repair and rehabilitation.”

In addition, the City cited six secondary objectives:

1) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion is preserved as an historic resource;

2) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion building and property are put to productive use;

3) To ensure that future use of the Flanders Mansion and property will not cause significant traffic, parking, or noise impacts on the surrounding neighborhood;

4) To ensure that future use will not significantly disrupt the public’s enjoyment of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve or the Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden;

5) To ensure that environmental resources of the park are protected; and

6) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion parcel continues to provide the public with as many park benefits as are practical.

All of the six secondary project objectives can be accomplished through the leasing of the Flanders Mansion to the Flanders Foundation. Importantly, leasing the Flanders Mansion to the Flanders Foundation would avoid the identified “significant” and “unavoidable” adverse environmental impacts associated with the permanent loss of parkland. And, since the Flanders Mansion parcel has historically been an integral component of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, leasing the Flanders Mansion to the Flanders Foundation would maintain the geographical integrity of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, the city’s largest park. As to the primary objective, divestment of the Flanders Mansion because of repair and rehabilitation requirements, this represents an abdication of the duties and responsibilities of the City Council to comply with the Municipal Code and, most importantly, a failure to honor their responsibility as stewards of public buildings, property and parkland.

Lastly, the Flanders Foundation deserves acknowledgement from the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and a commitment by the City to meet with members of the Flanders Foundation for the purpose of discussing a public-private partnership involving the leasing of the Flanders Mansion to the Flanders Foundation to ensure the Flanders Mansion remains a publically owned building and the integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve is maintained now and into the future.

PROGRESS REPORT: Fourth Avenue Riparian Habitat and Pathway Project

ABSTRACT: A photographic display showing the progress being made on the Fourth Avenue Riparian Habitat and Pathway Project by Green Valley Landscaping is presented. Trees courtesy of Valley Crest Tree Company. The project includes: a pedestrian path; native riparian landscaping; several pools in the storm drain to slow flow velocity; and drainage pipes to percolate storm water back into the soil. Green Valley Landscaping appears to be on schedule for completion of the project by the beginning of February 2009, approximately 90 days since commencement of work.

View to the west, from Monte Verde St. & 4th Av.
Trees include Coast Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia), Italian Alders (Alnus cordata) and California Sycamore (Platanus Racemosa)

View to the west, between Monte Verde St. & Casanova
View of pedestrian pathway under construction, storm drainage trench

View of groundcover plants, yet to be planted

Between San Antonio Av. & Carmelo
View of pedestrian pathway under construction, curb, settling pond and storm drainage trench

Representative settling pond along the storm drainage trench

RDEIR: INFORMATION & COMMENTS

• The public comment period for the RECIRCULATED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY (RDEIR) ends Wednesday, February 18, 2009, according to Leslie Fenton, Administrative Coordinator, Community Planning and Building Department. All comments must to submitted to the City’s Community Planning and Building Department, as follows:

Sean Conroy
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Community Planning & Building Department
P.O. Drawer G
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA. 93921

Email: sconroy@ci.carmel.ca.us
Phone: (831) 620-2010
Fax: (831) 620-2014

Note: Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion for the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property (RDEIR)

• If a majority of City Council Members vote to sell the Flanders Mansion Property, then the City Council must adopt a statement of overriding considerations consisting of findings of alternative infeasibility supported by substantial evidence; findings of infeasibility must include “specific economic, legal, social, technical, or other considerations.” Given that the City has contracted with CBRE, Inc. for an economic feasibility analysis, it is anticipated that the City will cite evidence from the economic feasibility analysis to support their contention that the lease alternatives are infeasible compared to the sale alternative.

• The Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property, recognized in the Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan as “an intrinsic part of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve,” would result not only in the permanent loss of parkland, but the sale would conflict with numerous goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan intended to minimize impacts to parkland and promote public use of publically owned parkland.

• The Amended Judgment Granting Petition for Writ of Mandamus for The Flanders Foundation vs. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (Mont. Co. Super. Ct. Case No. M76728) recognized the City’s previous certification and resolutions “failed to recognize the Flanders Mansion parcel had historically been considered part of the park;” as such, the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property, resulting in the permanent loss of parkland, would destroy the integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve and therefore severely diminish park users enjoyment of the Preserve forever.

• The Flanders Mansion ("Outlands in the Eighty Acres") is a listed National Register of Historic Places historic resources under local significance for "architecture/engineering." The City's primary project objective in selling Flanders Mansion is to divest the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea of the Flanders Mansion because of the "need of significant short-term and long-term repair and rehabilitation." Given the financial condition of the City and the historic status of the Flanders Mansion as a historic resource and as an integral component of the Preserve, the City's stated reason for selling the Flanders Mansion should not persuade Carmelites to vote for the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property.

RDEIR: ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT (6.0)

ABSTRACT: Selected sections of Alternatives to the Proposed Project (6.0), including INTRODUCTION (6.1), SUMMARY OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS (6.2), NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE (6.3), LEASE ALTERNATIVES (6.4), SALE WITH CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS (6.5), DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS (6.6) and ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE (6.7), are presented.

6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

6.1 INTRODUCTION

CEQA Guidelines §15126.6 requires the consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that could feasibly attain most of the basis objectives of the project. The CEQA Guidelines further require that the discussion focus on alternatives capable of eliminating significant adverse impacts of the project or reducing them to a less-than-significant level, even if the alternative would not fully attain the project objectives or would be more costly. The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by the “rule of reason,” which requires an EIR to evaluate only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. An EIR need not consider alternatives that have effects that cannot be reasonably ascertained and/or are remote and speculative.

6.2 SUMMARY OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

Objectives:

As described in Section 3.0 Project Description of this RDEIR, the primary project objective associated with the proposed project is to divest the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea of the Flanders Mansion property, which is in need of significant short-term and long-term repair and rehabilitation. In addition to this primary objective, there are several secondary objectives as follows:

• To ensure that the Flanders Mansion is preserved as a historic resource;

• To ensure that the Flanders Mansion building and property are put to productive use;

• To ensure that future use of the Flanders Mansion and property will not cause significant traffic, parking, or noise impacts on the surrounding neighborhood;

• To ensure that future use will not significantly disrupt the public’s enjoyment of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve or the Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden;

• To ensure the environmental resources of the park are protected; and

• To ensure that the Flanders Mansion parcel continues to provide the public with as many park benefits as are practical.

Significant Impacts

The alternatives analysis is intended to focus on eliminating, or reducing in significance, those project impacts identified in the RDEIR as significant and unavoidable. Significant and unavoidable impacts are those effects of the project that would affect either natural systems or other community resources and cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact level.

The proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts in the following categories, as described in this RDEIR: aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, and transportation/traffic. All impacts associated with the proposed project can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of mitigations identified in this RDEIR, with the exception of impacts related to (1) land use and planning and (2) parks and recreation. The following significant, unavoidable impacts were identified for the sale of Flanders Mansion:

• Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would conflict with certain goals, objectives and policies identified in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan related to parkland, including G 5-6, O5-21, P5-46 , and P-5-107, and

• Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in a loss of an area of parkland available to the public that provides a wide variety of park benefits and is integrated into the Mission Trails Nature Preserve in a manner that facilities or significantly enhances the use and enjoyment of other areas of the Preserve. This would represent a permanent loss of publically owned parkland.

6.3 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE

Description

CEQA requires the discussion of the No Project Alternative “to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project” (CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(1)). Under the No Project Alternative, the Flanders Mansion Property would not be sold by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the property would continue to remain vacant in its current state. This analysis assumes that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would continue to implement necessary improvements to comply with the Superior Court’s ruling regarding deferred maintenance of the Mansion, requiring the City to implement reasonable interim measures as necessary to avoid further significant deterioration of the Mansion. This alternative assumes that no additional facility upgrades beyond those required by the Superior Court ruling would be implemented. Although limited use of the facility may occur under this alternative, the following analysis assumes that the property would remain vacant. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(3), the following analysis compares the environmental impacts of the property remaining in its existing state versus the potential environmental impacts that would occur as a result of the proposed project.

Summary

In summary, the No Project Alternative would significantly lessen and/or avoid project-related impacts related to land use and planning and parks and recreation. This alternative would also significantly lessen or avoid impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, and transportation/traffic. However, this alternative would result in approximately the same level of impacts as the project in regard to cultural resources. The Mansion would continue to remain vacant, although it could be periodically used by the City. Unlike the proposed project, this alternative would not be subject to conditions or mitigation measures identified in this RDEIR. Overall, this alternative would significantly avoid most of the identified significant impacts, would fail to meet the primary project objective of divestment of the Flanders Mansion property, and would only meet some of the secondary objectives identified by the City.

6.4 LEASE ALTERNATIVES

LEASE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE

Description

This alternative would consist of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea retaining ownership of the Flanders Mansion property and leasing the property as a single-family residence. This alternative assumes that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would implement some facility upgrades and maintenance requirements in order to comply with the Superior Court’s ruling. In addition, this alternative also assumes that the City, prior to the lease of the building, would implement additional facility upgrades to ensure that the Flanders Mansion is leasable. This alternative also assumes that exterior features, such as fencing, may be erected on the property to provide privacy to the future lessee. Future terms of the lease agreement would be determined at the time a lessee was identified. This alternative assumes that the various conditions and mitigation measures identified in this RDEIR would be applicable to the future use of the property.

Summary

In summary, this alternative proposes the lease of the Flanders Mansion as a single-family residence and would significantly lessen impacts associated with the proposed project in regard to land use and planning, parks and recreation, and transportation/traffic. This alternative would avoid impacts due to the permanent loss of parkland since the City would retain ownership of the property. Although this alternative would not result in the sale of parkland, this alternative would still result in the elimination of existing park benefits associated with the Property since public access would be restricted to the Property during the term of the lease. Exterior elements, such as fencing, would physically separate the property from the remainder of the Preserve and essentially result in the same levels of impacts as the proposed project during the term of the lease. This alternative would result in approximately the same level of impacts in regards to aesthetics, biological resources, and cultural resources as the proposed project. Mitigation measures would still be necessary in order to ensure that the future use of the Mansion as a single-family residence would not result in additional impacts to the surrounding Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the adjacent Lester Rowntree Arboretum.

LEASE FOR PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC USE

Description

This alternative would consist of the City retaining ownership of the Flanders Mansion property and subsequently leasing the facility to a low-intensity public/quasi-public use. The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would still be responsible for implementing necessary facility upgrades and maintenance requirements in accordance with the findings of the Superior Court. Moreover, this alternative assumes that the City would be required to implement additional facility upgrades in order for the building to be leasable. Similar to the single-family lease alternative, this analysis assumes that some exterior improvements may be made depending on the type of public/quasi-public use. As a result, this alternative assumes that public access to and through the site could be restricted. This alternative assumes that exterior changes, such as fencing or other exterior elements, could be added as part of this alternative. While some limited public access may be permitted as part of daily operations or on a more limited basis, such as special events, this analysis assumes full public access would be restricted under this alternative. Future terms of the lease agreement would be determined at the time a lessee is identified. A number of the mitigation measures that would be applied to the single-family residential use lease alternative would be applicable.

Summary

In summary, this alternative would significantly lessen impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, and land use and planning. This alternative would also avoid significant and unavoidable impacts related to parks and recreation since this alternative would not result in the permanent loss of parkland. Park benefits associated with the Property may be minimized depending on the extent of exterior improvements and nature of the public/quasi-public use. As identified above, this alternative has the potential to generate substantially more traffic than a single-family residential use and, therefore, has the potential to result in additional traffic-related impacts. The future lease agreement could still be subjected to certain conditions and mitigation measures identified in this RDIER, but it is assumed that this alternative would avoid the majority of project impacts associated with biological resources and cultural resources. This alternative would not achieve the primary project objective or secondary objectives related to the minimization of traffic-related impacts. Park benefits may also be reduced under this alternative.

6.5 SALE WITH CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS

Description

This alternative would consist of recording conservation easements on certain portions of the Flanders Mansion Property in order to minimize potential impacts to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum and a number of existing trails that would need to be reconfigured as a result of the proposed project. Specifically, this alternative consists of applying a conservation easement (or reducing the parcel size) over portions of the Lester Rowntree Arboretum that are located within the boundaries of the Flanders Mansion parcel. This alternative would also consist of recording an easement or reducing the size along the eastern portion of the driveway to preserve existing trail access in the Mission Trail Nature Preserve (Serra Trail) and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum. A scenic/conservation easement covering the westerly/southwesterly boundary of the site to include areas bordering ESHA would be recorded to minimize potential biological impacts. The purpose of these easements would be to prevent a future property owner from erecting exterior elements or causing changes to the property within areas that are particularly sensitive, provide access to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, and provide areas of the site that provide park benefits. These easements are intended to reduce and/or avoid significant impacts due to the permanent loss of parkland, ensure that park benefits associated with the Property are preserved, provide continued public use of certain portions of the property, and protect environmental resources. The total land area covered by the easement would be approximately 0.5 acres. The total remaining area of the property under this alternative would be 0.752 acres, and it is assumed that all conditions and mitigations identified in this RDEIR would be applicable. Figure 6-1 provides a graphical representation of the alternative parcel configuration and easement. Implementation of this alternative would retain existing park benefits associated with the Flanders Mansion Property, while still allowing the City to divest itself of the property. This alternative assumes that impacted trails would also be reconfigured and additional trail connections would be provided to address project impacts. This alternative is not use specific; therefore, it is assumed that either a single family or low-intensity public/quasi-public use could occupy the property.

Summary

This alternative would lessen potential impacts to parks and recreation due to the loss of parkland and associated park benefits. This alternative would minimize impacts to the adjacent Lester Rowntree Arboretum and reduce impacts to biological resources and aesthetics. This alternative would significantly lessen the extent of project impacts in terms of land use and planning and would also minimize potential impacts related to cultural resources. Although this alternative would still result in the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property, this alternative would retain existing park benefits associated with the Property by effectively restricting the usable area of the parcel in order to minimize impacts to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. This alternative would minimize potential impacts as compared with the proposed project and would still achieve the majority of the project’s objectives.

6.6 DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS

In the Superior Court’s findings concerning the adequacy of the 2005 EIR, the Superior Court found that the City “abused its discretion and violated CEQA because it failed to proceed in the manner required by law and approved the sale of the Flanders Mansion when the potential lease of the Mansion…is an alternative to sale that has not been shown to be infeasible.” CEQA Guidelines §15091 specifically requires that “no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes” specific findings regarding each of the significant environmental impacts. CEQA Guidelines §15091(a) (3) further requires that a public agency must make findings of infeasibility regarding the rejection of an alternative that would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in an EIR. CEQA Guidelines §15091(a) (3) states that specific economic, legal, social, technical, or other considerations may make an alternative infeasible. Findings of infeasibility must be supported by substantial evidence (CEQA Guidelines §15091(b)).

CEQA further states that a public agency shall not decide to approve a project unless the agency has “determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable…are acceptable due to overriding concerns.” (CEQA Guidelines §15092(b)(2)(B)). Overriding concerns may include specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other aspects of the project that outweigh the adverse environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines §15093(a)). The Superior Court found that the City “could not legally adopt a statement of overriding considerations without making supportable findings regarding the infeasibility of alternatives.” The Court found that even if a particular alternative, in this case the lease alternative, would be more costly to the City, absent substantial evidence in the form of an economic analysis…the project cannot be approved because the City failed to demonstrate alternative infeasibility. The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea will consider evidence and findings during the project deliberation process in compliance with CEQA.

Based on the Superior Court’s findings, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is in the process of preparing an economic feasibility analysis that evaluates the feasibility of potential project alternatives vis-à-vis the relevant project objectives and various economic considerations. Findings of feasibility will ultimately be up to the discretion of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea as part of the project approval process required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15092.

6.7 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE

CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project be specified, if one is identified. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is supposed to minimize adverse impacts to the project site and surrounding environment while achieving the basic objectives of the project. The basic project objective associated with the proposed project is the divestment of the Flanders Mansion Property. The “No Project” alternative could be considered the environmentally superior alternative because all significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed project would be avoided. However, this alternative does not achieve the basic project objective. CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e) (2) states: If the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.

The 2005 DEIR, as modified, identified that the Lease Alternative (previously referred to as “Alternative 2” in the 2007 DEIR) would be the environmentally superior alternative because that alternative would reduce impacts to historic resources and park resources since the City would retain ownership. In addition, the 2005 DEIR also determined that the Lease Alternative would minimize potential impacts on adjacent parkland since the property would be retained by the City. Moreover, it was also determined that this alternative would avoid significant and unavoidable impacts related to 1) land use and planning, and 2) parks and recreation. The 2005 DEIR, as modified, also recognized that the Reduced Parcel Size/Mitigated Alternative (previously referred to as “Alternative 6” in the 2005 DEIR) would be the environmentally superior alternative if the Lease Alternative was determined to be infeasible. During the project deliberation process, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea rejected the Lease Alternative as infeasible. However, the Superior Court determined that the City violated CEQA because it did not adopt findings of infeasibility supported by substantial evidence.

Consistent with the findings of the 2005 DEIR, as modified, the Lease Alternatives identified in this RDEIR are considered environmentally superior. Both of the Lease Alternatives would significantly reduce potential environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project. While the Lease Alternatives (i.e., single-family residential or public/quasi-public) would avoid significant project impacts, these alternatives would fail to meet the primary project purpose, in addition to secondary project objectives. Depending on the type of use, lease of the property could result in additional impacts related to traffic and transportation. As identified elsewhere in this RDEIR, a public/quasi-public use would generate additional daily traffic trips. Lease of the Flanders Mansion may also result in impacts due to the loss of park benefits during the term of the lease. However, these impacts would be limited to the duration of the lease agreement, and upon termination of the agreement public use of the property could resume.

The Sale with Conservation Easements and Mitigation Alternative would lessen potential impacts associated with the proposed project while achieving the primary project purpose. This alternative would also satisfy secondary objectives. The sale with Easements and Mitigations Alternative would result in the sale of parkland and, therefore, would still result in impacts related to the permanent loss of parkland. However, this alternative would ensure that park benefits associated with the Property would be maintained by conveying permanent easements to the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea that provide continued trail access, minimize impacts to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, and protect surrounding sensitive resources.

Both Lease Alternatives and the Sale with Conservation Easements and Mitigations Alternative would significantly reduce the extent of impacts as compared to the proposed project, and both can be considered environmentally superior to the proposed project. However, the Lease Alternatives would retain City ownership of the Property and preserve flexibility on how the property is used in the future (i.e., after the term of the lease). If the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea determines that the Lease Alternatives are infeasible for specific economic, legal, social, technical, or other considerations, the Sale with Conservation Easements and Mitigations Alternative also would be considered the environmentally superior alternative.

Figure 6-1 Sale with Conservation Easements and Mitigation Alternative

RDEIR: CEQA CONSIDERATIONS (5.0)

ABSTRACT: Selected sections of CEQA Considerations (5.0), including SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS (5.1) and CUMULATIVE IMPACTS (5.5) are presented. Other sections, including IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES (5.2), GROWTH INDUCEMENT (5.3) and EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT (5.4), are not presented.

5.0 CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

CEQA Guidelines §15126 requires that an EIR discuss the significant environmental effects associated with the project, significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided, significant irreversible environmental change, potential growth inducing impacts, mitigation measures intended to minimize significant impacts, and alternatives to the proposed project. CEQA Guidelines §15128 further states that an EIR shall briefly indicate the reasons that various possible significant effects were determined not to be significant. CEQA Guidelines §15130 also requires that an EIR discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considered.

5.1 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

CEQA Guidelines §15126.2(b) requires that an EIR describe any significant impacts that cannot be mitigated or reduced to a level of less-than-significant. Since a prospective buyer has not been identified and therefore the actual use of the subject property may vary, the following significant unavoidable impacts are considered “potential.” Actual impacts will vary according to the future use; however, as a conservative approach to fully evaluate potential project-induced impacts, this EIR evaluated a range of potential uses. The following impacts were identified as significant and unavoidable:

• Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in sale of publically owned parkland and would therefore conflict with several goals, objectives and policies identified in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan; and

• Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss of an area of parkland available to the public that provides a wide variety of park benefits and is integrated into the Mission Trails Nature Preserve in a manner that facilities or significantly enhances the use and enjoyment of other areas of the Preserve.

A substantive discussion of each of the significant and unavoidable project-induced impacts identified above is provided in each of their respective sections.


5.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

CEQA Guidelines §15130 requires an EIR to discuss cumulative impacts of a proposed project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. CEQA Guidelines §15355 defines a cumulative impact as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” According to CEQA Guidelines §15065(a)(3), cumulatively considerable means “that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” The purpose of the cumulative impact analysis is to identify and summarize the environmental impacts of the proposed project in conjunction with approved and anticipated development in the project area. CEQA Guidelines §15130(a)(2) further states that when the incremental effects of a project combined with other projects is not significant, an EIR shall briefly indicate why the impact is not significant. The CEQA Guidelines stipulate that the discussion of cumulative impacts “shall reflect the severity of the impacts, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as provided for the effects attributable to the project alone” (CEQA Guidelines §15130(b)).

Land Use

Development of the proposed project has the potential to result in conflicts with several goals, objectives and policies contained in the City’s adopted General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan that are intended to minimize and/or avoid impacts to parkland. While it is ultimately up to the discretion of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to determine whether the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan, this RDEIR determined that the proposed project would result in the permanent loss of parkland and therefore has the potential to conflict with the following goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan related to parkland: G5-6, O5-21, P5-46 and P5-107. Accordingly, this RDEIR determined that this would represent a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact, however, is locally significant and would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact. The cumulative projects identified above are generally consistent with the land uses designations and intended development projections identified in the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. For these reasons, the proposed project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact.

Recreation

Development is accordance with the cumulative project list would not significantly impact the use of existing park or recreational facilities such that physical impacts to the environment would occur. While this RDEIR determined that the proposed project would represent a significant and unavoidable impact due to the loss of public parkland, this impact is individually significant and would not constitute a cumulative level impact as no projects identified in the cumulative project list would impact existing park or recreational facilities (see Section 4.5 Parks and Recreation).

RDEIR: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES (4.0)

ABSTRACT: Selected sections of Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures (4.0) related to LAND USE AND PLANNING (4.4) and PARKS AND RECREATION (4.5) are presented. Other sections which have less-than-significant levels of significant environmental impacts after mitigation, including AESTHETICS (4.1), BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (4.2), CULTURAL RESOURCES (4.3) and TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION (4.6), are not presented

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

4.4 LAND USE AND PLANNING

Introduction

This section analyzes the project’s land use effects, specifically its potential to conflict with those parts of applicable plans and zoning ordinances, including the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan land Use Element and Zoning Code, that are intended to avoid or minimize potential environmental impacts…The analysis contained in this section has also been revised and updated to reflect the Superior Court’s determination regarding the 2005 FEIR.

Although the Superior Court confirmed that the City acted within its discretionary in terms of determining project consistency, the Court also ruled that the project site is considered parkland. Accordingly, this RDEIR has been updated to accurately reflect the parkland status of the parcel to ensure consistency with the Court’s ruling.

Setting

The 1.252-acre project site, which is accessible from Hatton Road, is entirely within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea. The Flanders Mansion Property is considered an integral part Mission Trail Nature Preserve because it provides park benefits and also facilities the use of other areas of the 35-acre preserve. Although access to the Flanders Mansion building has been limited, the property and the building are recognized as an important component of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. According to the General Plan Land Use Map, the project site is designated as Open Space/Recreation/Cultural (see Figure 4.4-1). According to Title 17 of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code, the project site is zoned P-2, Improved Parklands. The remaining 33.74-acres of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve are zoned P-1, Natural Parklands and Preserves. No physical boundaries separate the Flanders Mansion Property from the remaining portion of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. The grounds of the Flanders Mansion Property are directly accessible from several trails within the Preserve and it is easily accessed by the general public.

The Flanders Mansion Property is entirely surrounded by the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Land uses immediately adjacent to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve include single-family residential neighborhoods zoned R-1 and R-1-C-20 located within the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to the west. A single-family residential neighborhood, within the jurisdiction of Monterey County, known as Hatton Fields, is located to the east. The Carmel Mission is located immediately south of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve across Rio Road. Land uses to the north consist of predominately single family residential neighborhoods.

Regulatory Environment

Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan. The purpose of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan is to 1) establish and maintain long-range goals for the preservation and use of Mission Trail Nature Preserve; and 2) guide the City in its decision making process concerning the management of Mission Trail Nature Preserve. According to the Master Plan, the Preserve consists of approximately 35-acres of land classified as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) according to 30107.5 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, as amended. 30107.5 defines ESHA as “any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities….” The City’s adopted General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan recognizes that the Flanders Mansion site in not within ESHA, but is within an area designated as an ESHA buffer (see Figure 4.4-2).

The Master Plan identifies several goals, objectives and policies consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan. According to the Master Plan, the Flanders Mansion is an intrinsic part of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the surrounding area...

Thresholds of Significance

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, a project impact would be considered significant if the project would:

• Physically divide an established community;

• Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect;

• Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan; or

• Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Impacts and Mitigation

Direct Impact

The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property may result in potential land use conflicts with several General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan goals, objectives, and policies that are intended to avoid impacts to parkland and ensure that park benefits are maximized and preserved. The project site is considered parkland. This RDEIR, consistent with the analysis contained in the 2005 DEIR and FEIR, has determined that the project would result in the permanent loss of parkland and associated park benefits. (see Section 4.6 Parks and Recreation). This is identified as an unavoidable impact that is locally significant to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

As identified in the 2005 DEIR and FEIR, the proposed project may conflict with the following goals, objectives and policies: P5-26, P5-139, P5-107, P6-8, P7-3, O5-21, O5-32, O5-41, G5-6, G5-8 and G5-13. These goals, objectives and policies are intended to promote public use of parklands, provide enhances trail access within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, provide public access to City-owned parks, preserve open-space and parks, preserve the aesthetic characteristics of the City, and preserve the forested and tranquil character of Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Implementation of the proposed project would result is the permanent loss of parkland and associated park benefits. The permanent loss of parkland is considered a significance and unavoidable impact. The permanent loss of parkland would conflict with goals, objectives and policies intended on avoiding and/or minimizing impacts to parkland...

Although the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan recognizes that the City may decide to divest itself of the Flanders Mansion property, sale of the Mansion would result in a significant and unavoidable impact due to the loss of parkland and associated park benefits. This impact would result in potential land use conflicts with several policies that are intended to avoid impacts to parkland. While mitigation measures have been incorporated into this RDEIR to ensure potential project-related impacts are minimized, the permanent loss of parkland would nevertheless represent a significant and unavoidable impact that would conflict with policies that are intended to avoid and/or minimize potential impacts to parkland.

Impact

Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the permanent loss of parkland and therefore has the potential to conflict with several goals, objectives and policies identified in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan intended on minimizing impacts to parkland and promoting public use of publically owned parkland. Specifically, the proposed project would conflict with the following goals and policies: G5-6, O5-21, P5-46, and P5-107. This is considered a potentially significant that cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation:

None identified.


4.5 PARKS AND RECREATION

Introduction

This section analyzes the project’s impacts to recreation facilities, specifically the project’s impact due to loss of trail access to the surrounding Mission Trail Nature Preserve, as well as impacts related to the loss of parkland and park benefits associated with the Flanders Mansion Property. This section also addresses impacts to the integrity of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve due to the sale of parkland.

Setting

The City maintains nine designated parks encompassing 65.5 acres or 10.25% of the total City land area. The City also provides forested open space along the margins of most streets throughout the residential district forming attractive space for daily walks for its residents and visitors. As a popular visitor destination, The City is recognized for its abundance of recreational and cultural amenities. Throughout the year the City either hosts or supports events providing recreational opportunities to all age groups and a wide variety of interests.

The Flanders Mansion Property is located within the boundaries of, and surrounded by, the largest of the City’s parks: the 35-acre Mission Trail Nature Preserve. The Mission Trail Nature Preserve was acquired by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is 1971. Most of it was zoned as passive park (P-1). The area around Flanders Mansion was zoned Improved Parkland (P-2), parkland with existing improvements/buildings. In the Coastal Land Use Plan, the City describes the Mission Trail Nature Preserve as having four planning units: 1) Martin Road parcel, 2) Park Proper, 3) Flanders Mansion/Arboretum and 4) Outlet Meadow. Each designation recognizes different physiographic and/or biological resources found in the preserve. Most of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve is designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). The project site (the Flanders Mansion Property) is not a designated ESHA.

Mission Trail Nature Preserve is open to the public for passive recreational use. There are five entrances to the park: Mountain View Avenue, Rio Road, 11th Avenue, Martin Road and Hatton Road. These entrances lead to a series of trails meandering throughout the Preserve. Figure 4.5-1 shows the existing Mission Trail Nature Preserve trail system surrounding the Flanders Mansion Property. This entire series of trails exceeds three miles in length and is intended for foot traffic only. The boundary between the Flanders Mansion Property and the remainder of the park is unfenced and park users can freely pass through the Mansion Property to access surrounding parkland areas, including the Lester Rowntree Arboretum. Some trail connections are possible only by passing through the Mansion Property. Approximately 0.04 acres of the Arboretum is located within the boundaries of the project site. The Arboretum was created to provide a quiet nature study area where native California trees, shrubs and plants are grown for exhibition and study and displayed to enhance the natural beauty of the area.

Regulatory Environment

City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. The City of Carmel-by the-Sea General Plan provides policies for protection of recreational facilities and parks/open space. The following policies from the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan are applicable to the project site:

G5-3 Protect, conserve and enhance the unique natural beauty and irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel and its sphere of influence, including its biological resources, water resources, and scenic routes and corridors.

G5-4 Preserve and enhance the City’s legacy of an urbanized forest of predominately Monterey Pine, Coast Live Oak and Monterey Cypress.

G5-6 Preserve and acquire open space and parks.

O5-21 Optimize public use of City parks.

P5-46 Preserve and protect areas within the City’s jurisdiction which due to their outstanding aesthetic quality, historical value, wildlife habitats or scenic viewsheds, should be maintained in permanent open space to enhance the quality of life. Such acquired areas would be left in a natural state or restored for aesthetic and/or wildlife purposes.

P5-105 Implement the recommendations of all existing Master Plans considering prioritized needs and available funding:
-Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan
-Shoreline Management Plan
-Forest Hill Park Master Plan

P5-107 Provide for public access and public enjoyment of City parks and open space.

P5-108 Provide and maintain informal trails if there is public demand.

Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan. The Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan was approved by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Forest and Beach Commission and adopted by the City Council in 1979. This document was updated as part of the Coastal Land Use Plan. The purpose of the Master Plan is twofold:

1. To establish and maintain long-range goals for preservation and use of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

2. To guide the City in its decision making process concerning the management of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

The Master Plan sometimes calls the Flanders Mansion Property “Outlands” as is referenced as such in Master Plan policies. The following policies from the Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan are applicable to the site:

P5-139 Provide maximum pubic access to and within Mission Trail Nature Preserve that is easy to maintain and protects environmental resources.

P5-141 If retained by the City, preserve the Outlands property and grounds at Mission Trail Nature Preserve consistent with its status as a nationally registered historical resource.

P5-142 If retained by the City, utilize the Outlands property at Mission
Trail Nature Preserve in a manner beneficial to the residents of Carmel-by-the-Sea while minimizing its expense to the City.

P5-143 If retained by the City, support uses at the Outlands property that are compatible with its location in Mission Trail Nature Preserve and adjacent to the Rowntree Native Plant Garden and Hatton Road neighborhood.

G5-8 Preserve the forested tranquil atmosphere of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

P5-124 Consider removal of both intentionally introduced plants and
invasives by instituting an annual program through joint efforts of contract workers and volunteers.

O5-32 Provide reasonable low-impact uses of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve for the enjoyment of its natural surroundings and plant and wildlife inhabitants.

O5-33 Maintain the Rowntree Native Plant Garden within Mission Trail Nature Preserve as an area where the general public can view and study native California plants and trees. The goal is that the knowledge gained will lead to an expanded use of California native plants in private landscapes.

Thresholds of Significance

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, a project impact would be considered if the project would:

• Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or

• Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment

Impacts and Mitigation

Parkland

The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property is anticipated to result in direct impacts related to the loss of parkland and park benefits associated with the Property. For the purposes of the following analysis, this RDEIR assumes that the sale of publically-owned parkland would directly result in the loss of public access to parkland. This would therefore represent a loss of parkland that is currently accessible to the public. This is considered a direct impact resulting in a change in ownership…For the purpose of this analysis, an impact would be considered potentially significant if it would result in the loss of an area of parkland that provides a wide variety of park benefits and that is integrated into the Mission Trail Nature Preserve in a manner that facilities or substantially enhances the use and enjoyment of other areas of the Preserve.

Direct Impact

The Flanders Mansion Property provides a convenient place for the public to access adjacent parkland and the Arboretum for recreational activities. The boundary between Flanders Mansion and Mission Trail Nature Preserve is unfenced and park users can freely access the site. As a result, the property grounds are routinely used by the general public for passive recreational purposes. While access to the building has generally been limited, access to the exterior grounds is currently unrestricted. A change in ownership of the Flanders Mansion Property while not directly affecting the parkland zoning designation, would result in the permanent loss of access to the site by the general public. In addition, the project would directly impact the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, a portion which is located on the property (0.04 acres).

Implementation of the proposed project would preclude future recreational use of the property and would directly result in the loss of park benefits associated with the property. Although the Flanders Mansion and property is not dedicated exclusively for park purposes, the site is still considered parkland based on 1) its historic use by the public, 2) its zoning designation, and 3) the Superior Court’s determination that the site is considered parkland as a matter of law. While the site would continue to retain its existing zoning designation as P-2 (Improved Parkland), its zoning designation as parkland would have only a minimal value because the public would be unable to derive park benefits from the Property. It should be noted, however, that the zoning designation does limit future uses and development of the property. Sale of the property would effectively result in the permanent loss of parkland located within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Although the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would represent a relatively small reduction in the total amount of parkland (2% of all parkland) in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, the proposed project would significantly impact the Mission Trail Nature Preserve by directly impacting the cohesive nature of the Preserve.

Based on the CEQA standards of significance, the potential loss of 1.252 acres of parkland would not necessarily be considered a significant impact given the large amount of other parks and recreational opportunities within the City. For the purposes of this RDEIR, however, a change in ownership would directly impact the integrity of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve by eliminating access to and certain views of a portion of the park currently used by park visitors. Moreover, the Flanders Mansion and property are recognized in the Mission Trail Nature Preserve Master Plan as being an integral component of the Preserve. The sale of the Flanders Mansion to a private person or organization would remove 1.252 acres of parkland currently accessible by the public from the surrounding park setting. The sale of the Flanders Mansion is considered significant due to 1) the property’s location entirely within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve; 2) the property’s role in providing park benefits; 3) the presence of the Flanders Mansion, which adds significantly to the public experience of the park; and 4) the proximity of the park to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum

Impact

Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss locally significant parkland that is considered an integral component of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Since this loss of parkland is locally significant, this is considered a significant unavoidable impact that can not be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation

None identified

RDEIR: PROJECT DESCRIPTION (3.0)

ABSTRACT: Selected sections of Project Description (3.0) are presented, including PROJECT LOCATION AND AREA (3.1), PROJECT BACKGROUND (3.2) and PROJECT OBJECTIVES (3.3). Other sections, namely PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS (3.4) and REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS (3.5) are not presented.

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This section presents the project description as required by CEQA Guidelines §15124. The proposed project consists of the sale of the Flanders Mansion property, a 1.252 acre parcel together with all improvements. The project site is considered parkland and is zoned P-2 (Improved Parkland). The grounds of the Flanders Mansion property have historically been used by the public for passive recreational activities and the property provides a number of park benefits. Surrounding the property is an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) zoned P-1. This area plus the project site are all part of the City’s largest park, the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. The building on the property (the Flanders Mansion) is recognized as a historic resource and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. No part of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve zoned P-1 is subject to sale and all of it would be retained as public parkland.

3.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND AREA

The project site is located in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, situated at the southernmost portion of the Monterey Peninsula in Monterey County, California (refer to Figure 3-1). The project site is known as the Flanders Mansion property (APN# 010-061-005). It is located within, and surrounded on all sides by, the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Immediately east of the Flanders Mansion property is a part of the Preserve known as the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, a native plant garden/arboretum. Both the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum are zoned P-1 (Unimproved Parkland) and are designated ESHA according to the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan. Land uses immediately adjacent to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve include single family residential neighborhoods zoned R-1 and R-1-C-20 located within the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to the west. A single family residential neighborhood, within the jurisdiction of Monterey County, known as Hatton Fields, is located to the east. The Carmel Mission is located immediately south of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve across Rio Road and land uses to the north consist predominately of single family residential neighborhoods. Figure 3-2 shows the project site and surrounding vicinity. The property is accessible by an approximately 350-foot long driveway from Hatton Road. Approximately 190 feet is included in the Flanders’ property. The remaining 160-foot driveway easement provides public access to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum. The area at the end of the driveway is currently used informally as public parking to access the Mission Trail Nature Preserve.

Mission Trail Nature Preserve includes 35 acres acquired by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea in 1971 and was zoned as a passive use park (P-1) except for Flanders Mansion which was zoned Improved Parkland (P-2). All of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve is open to the public for passive recreational use. There are five entrances to the park: Mountain View Avenue, Rio Road, 11th Avenue, Martin Road, and Hatton Road (See Figure 4.2-1). These entrances lead to a network of hiking trails, over three miles in extent, which provide access throughout the 35-acre park. The Mission Trail Nature Preserve is recognized for its scenic qualities, including expansive views of Fish Ranch, Point Lobos, the Carmel Mission, and Carmel Bay.

3.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND

In 1923, real estate developer Paul Flanders moved to Carmel to establish a business and a home. Flanders selected a site just inside the City limits and adjacent to the “Hatton Fields,” land he had purchased with his partners in the Carmel Realty Company to develop for residential use. To design his house, Flanders hired one of the first—if not the first—professional architect to work in Carmel. Flanders’ architect was noted San Francisco draftsman Henry Higby Gutterson.

The Flanders Mansion has been described in historic preservation documents as a remarkable example of Gutterson’s mature work. The English Cottage Tudor Revival was designed both technically and aesthetically to meet the realties of Carmel’s coastal climate. Gutterson sited the building into a slope in order to incorporate into his design the expansive views of the Carmel Valley, Santa Lucia Mountain Range, Carmel Bay, and the Pacific Ocean that were available from the property. The cement block building is a unique combination of English half-timbered, English country, and English cottage styles. The Flanders Mansion was fabricated of precast concrete units, (known as “Thermotite”), which was a new product at the time of the building’s construction. Some residences had employed this new product before construction of the Flanders Mansion, however none in a cavity wall system. The Flanders Mansion continues to be the only known example of cavity wall construction in the region.

In 1972, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea acquired the mansion and the adjoining parcel for $275,000. Since that time, the house has been used as an art institute, offices for the Carmel Preservation Foundation, offices and library for the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, and housing for various city employees and caretaker. In 1989, the Flanders Mansion was listed in the National Register of Historic Places for its significance in architecture. It has been vacant since 2003. The following is a chronological history of the Flanders Mansion Property, associated uses, and relevant information related to the Superior Court’s decision concerning the sale of the Flanders Mansion.

Chronological History:

1924: Paul Flanders builds his residence on the property.

1968: Proposed subdivision of Flanders property into 65 townhouses is denied by City.

1969: Re-submittal of subdivision for 45 units is denied by City.

1971: City purchases 17.5-acres Doolittle property, adjacent to Flanders, for $120,000.

1972: Proposed subdivision of Flanders property into 1-acre parcels is denied by City.

1972: City purchases 14.9-acres Flanders property for $275,000 on 15 August 1972. According to the City, the sale of the house to offset the cost of the adjacent open space lands was first considered shortly after the purchase was completed.

1973: City begins planning for Flanders-Doolittle properties as parkland.

1975: City Council certifies EIR for creation of a park, drainage, fill, trails, etc.

1977: Town hall meeting discusses possible uses for the Mansion. Options include residential lease, sale for residential use and lease to non-profit for public and/or non-profit use.

1977: City leases the Mansion to the City Administrator as single-family residence for $400 per month.

1979: City Council adopts R-1 zone for 1.43 acres around the Mansion and adopts a re-zone to P-1 for the surrounding parklands.

1980: City creates new P-2-A zoning district and zones the .83-acre area of land encompassing the Flanders Mansion and grounds as P-2-A.

1985: Planning Commission determines that sale of the Mansion would not conflict with the General Plan. (June)

1986: City Council adopts Resolution on sale of Flanders Mansion. (December)

1987: Negative Declaration prepared for sale of the Mansion, including General Plan amendment, rezone and re-subdivision.

1987: Planning Commission adopts Resolution No. 87-23 finding sale of the Mansion to be inconsistent with the General Plan. (April)

1987: City Council allows 6-months for Commissions, Committees and the public to develop a viable use for the Mansion.

1988: City adopts Resolution No. 88-97 finding sale of the Mansion inconsistent with the General Plan. (September)

1989: Mansion listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

1990: City leases Mansion to Carmel Heritage for $1.00 per year.
(Note: Other uses by non-profit groups such as the Lester Rowntree Arboretum Committee continued for portions of the Flanders Mansion for several years. Following this, a caretaker occupied the Mansion until approximately 2003. The Mansion has been vacant since this occupancy was terminated.)

1996: Task Force established to make recommendations for long-term use of the Mansion.

1996: City Council rejects conversion of Mansion into a youth hostel.

1996: City Council solicits proposals for use; submitted information for uses includes potential culinary institute, and/or use by CSUMB as well as other uses. Council allows 6-months to gather information.

1997: City Council directs the City Administrator to reject a proposal from Culinary Arts Institute because it would degrade the passive recreational environment in the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum.

1999: On December 7, the City Council considers proposal submitted by the Flanders Foundation and staff to prepare for the sale or lease of the Flanders Mansion as a single-family, historic residence and to formulate a lot line adjustment to ensure preservation of the Lester Rowntree Arboretum (Native Plant Garden).

2000: Planning Commission approves lot line adjustment creating 1.25-acre parcel under the Mansion subject to findings and conditions. On August 15, 2000, the City Council voted not to approve the concept to use the Flanders Mansion as a conference/cultural center. On September 19, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution 2000-115 authorizing the City Administrator to enter into a contract for real estate services with Coldwell Banker/Del Monte Realty in connection with the Flanders Mansion.

2003: On June 3, 2003, the City Council directed staff to coordinate the sale or lease of the Flanders Mansion and prepare the legal documents for City Council ratification, including the state statute requirements.

2004: City Council adopts ordinance rezoning the 1.25-acre Mansion parcel to P-2 and all of the surrounding parklands to P-1 as part of the Local Coastal Program.

2004: (September) City Council initiates discussion of infrastructure and capital funding needs over the next ten years.

2004: (October) City Council, Planning Commission and Forest and Beach Commission meet in joint session to discuss potential sale of real property assets to meet a portion of the City’s capital funding needs. Flanders Mansion is identified as the most likely candidate for sale.

2004: (November) City Council held a public scoping hearing for the sale of Flanders Mansion Property and determined the need to prepare an EIR because this sale would involve property zoned as Parkland (P-2), within and near existing parkland and an historic resource.

2005: (January) The City filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to interested agencies and organizations. NOP comments were received from the agencies and public on or before February 22, 2005. The Draft EIR was distributed to interested responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals on April 1, 2005 for a 45-day public review period which ended on May 16, 2005. Fifty-four comment letters were received by the City within the public review period.

2005: (August) The Final EIR was prepared and released for public review August 2005.

2005: (September) On September 22, 2005 the Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council approved the project, certified the EIR, adopted the Mitigation Monitoring Program and adopted a statement of overriding considerations for the sale of the Flanders Mansion property.

2007: (August) Amended Judgment Granting Petition for Writ of Mandamus for The Flanders Foundation vs. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (Mont. Co. Super. Ct. Case No. M76728), filed August 10, 2007 found the EIR to be inadequate because the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea failed to provide substantial evidence, in the form of an economic analysis, documenting that the environmentally superior alternative, lease of the Flanders Mansion, was considered infeasible. In addition, the city’s certification and other resolutions failed to recognize the Flanders Mansion parcel had historically been considered part of the park. The petition for the Writ of Mandamus raised challenges under CEQA, the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code, and the California Government Code, all in connection with the proposed sale of the Flanders Mansion by its owner, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.

2007: (November) As ordered in the Judgment, the City Council on November 6, 2007, adopted Resolution 2007-71 to rescind Resolutions Numbered 2005-55, 2005-56, 2005-57, 2005-58 to decertify the EIR for the Sale of the Flanders Mansion Property project and rescind resolutions related to project selection, overriding considerations, project implementation, mitigation measures and findings.

2008: City Council directs staff to initiate preparation of a Recirculated Draft EIR for the sale of Flanders Mansion Property consistent with the Superior Court’s ruling. Staff is also directed to authorize Architectural Resources Group (ARG) to prepare a cost estimate for necessary repairs to the Flanders Mansion. Staff is also directed to authorize CBRE, Inc., to prepare an economic feasibility analysis.

3.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

In accordance with §15124 of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must present a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. A description of the project’s objectives defines the project’s intent and facilities the formation of project alternatives. Specifically, §15124(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines states the following requirement: “A statement of the objectives sought by the proposed project. A clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project.” Consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines §15124(b), the following section presents both the primary and secondary project objectives associated with the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property...

The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea has identified the primary purpose of the proposed sale is to divest the City of the Flanders Mansion Property which is in need of significant short-term and long-term repair and rehabilitation. In addition to the primary purpose above, there are six secondary objectives.

1) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion is preserved as an historic resource;

2) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion building and property are put to productive use;

3) To ensure that future use of the Flanders Mansion and property will not cause significant traffic, parking, or noise impacts on the surrounding neighborhood;

4) To ensure that future use will not significantly disrupt the public’s enjoyment of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve or the Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden;

5) To ensure that environmental resources of the park are protected; and

6) To ensure that the Flanders Mansion parcel continues to provide the public with as many park benefits as are practical.

RDEIR: INTRODUCTION (1.0)

ABSTRACT: Selected sections of the Introduction (1.0) are presented, including INTRODUCTION (1.1), AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE (1.2), FLANDERS MANSION PROJECT SUMMARY (1.5) and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE RDEIR (1.6). Other sections, namely EIR PROCESS (1.3), CEQA REQUIREMENTS FOR RECIRCULATION (1.4), CONTENT, FORMAT, AND SUMMARY OF THE RECIRCULATED DRAFT EIR (1.7) and INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE (1.8), are not presented.

RECIRCULATED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SALE OF FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY, January 2009, DENISE DUFFY & ASSOCIATES, INC.

1.0 Introduction

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is part of the ongoing environmental review process for the proposed Flanders Mansion Project, which entails the sale of City-owned property, specifically the Flanders Mansion Property, a listed historical resource on the National Register of Historic Places, in the City of Carmel, California.

Reason for Recirculated EIR for the Project

In 2005, the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea certified an EIR (SCH# No. 2005011108) and approved a project involving the sale of the Flanders Mansion property. The City Council’s decision to approve the project, and the adequacy of the previous EIR on which it was based, were litigated and found by the court to be inadequate. Pursuant to the Amended Judgment of the Monterey County Superior Court in The Flanders Foundation vs. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, et al. (Mont. Co. Super. Ct. Case No. M76728), the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea rescinded its September 2005 certification of the August 2005 Final EIR (FEIR) for the proposed Flanders Mansion project.

This Revised Draft EIR is recirculated in its entirety to provide the public with a meaningful opportunity to comment on the additional data available as a result of modifications to the document based upon the court ruling. In accordance with Section 15088.5(f)(1), when an EIR is substantially revised and the entire document is recirculated, the lead agency may require reviewers to submit new comments and are not required to respond to those comments received during the earlier circulation period. In conformance with this section, the City is not including in this RDEIR the responses to those comments received in response to the previous document and provided in the Final EIR dated August 2005. Instead, this Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report modifies and revises the text contained in the August 2005 document (the now-decertified FEIR).

The following document is considered a Recirculated Draft EIR because significant new information and analyses have been added or changed to portions of the Draft EIR since it was circulated for public review on April 1, 2005 as modified in the 2005 FEIR. For purposes of clarity, this document will be referred to as the Recirculated Draft EIR, or RDEIR, and the previously circulated Draft EIR as modified in the August 2005 FEIR will be collectively referred to as the 2005 DEIR. Please note that public comments received on the 2005 DEIR during the public review period were taken into consideration as part of this RDEIR The analysis contained in this RDEIR includes information contained in the 2005 FEIR, plus new information and analysis where appropriate...

1.2 AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE

The purpose of an EIR is to inform the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives that support the objectives of the project. As defined by the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR is an “informational document” with the intended purpose to: “inform public agency decision-makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project.” Although the EIR does not control the ultimate decision on the project, the Lead Agency must consider the information in the EIR and respond to each significant effect identified in the EIR. As defined in the CEQA Guidelines, a “significant effect on the environment” is:

“...a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.”

This RDEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended. This EIR has been prepared by Denise Duffy and Associates, Inc. (DD&A) for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea as the “Lead Agency,” in consultation with the appropriate local, regional and state agencies.

1.5 FLANDERS MANSION PROJECT SUMMARY

The proposed project analyzed in both the 2005 DEIR and this RDEIR consists of the sale of City-owned property, specifically the Flanders Mansion Property, a listed historical resource on the National Register of Historic Places. The description of the proposed project has not substantially changed since the preparation of the 2005 DEIR with the exception of several modified project objectives. The project objectives for the project have been revised in this RDEIR to reflect changed circumstances associated with the project. In addition, revisions have been incorporated into this RDEIR to provide additional information concerning the status of the property as parkland. Where the previous project description was unclear additional language has been incorporated for clarification purposes. This RDEIR proposes the following changes relative to the 2005 DEIR:

• Proposed sale of City-owned property and a historic resource;
• Proposed sale consists of parkland zoned a P-2 (Improved Parkland); and
• Proposed sale shall comply with California Code §38440-38462 and §54220-54222, including but not limited to subjecting any proposed sale to a public vote.

1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE RDEIR

The review process for this RDEIR will involve the following procedural steps:

Public Notice/Public Review

CEQA Guidelines §15088.5 describes the procedures for recirculation of an EIR. The procedures require simultaneous submittal of a public Notice of Availability of the RDEIR and a Notice of Completion to the State Clearinghouse. The RDEIR will be subject to public review and comment for a period of 45 days...

All comments concerning the adequacy of the RDEIR must be addressed to:

Sean Conroy
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Community Planning & Building Department
P.O. Drawer G
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA. 93921

Responses to Comments/Final EIR
Following the 45-day public comment period on the RDEIR, a Final ERI will be prepared. The Final EIR will respond to written comments received during the public comment period on the RDEIR…No aspect of the proposed project will be approved until after the Final EIR is considered.

Certification of the EIR/Project Consideration
The City, as Lead Agency, will review and consider the Final EIR. If the City finds that the Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and has been prepared in accordance CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City will certify the adequacy and completeness of the Final EIR. A decision to approve the project will be accompanied by written findings in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15091, and if applicable, §15093.

Pursuant to the policy stated in §21002 and §21002.1 of CEQA, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant effects. Although the EIR does not control the lead agency’s ultimate decision on the project, the City must consider the information in the EIR and respond to each significant effect identified in the EIR. If significant adverse environmental effects are identified in the EIR, approval of the project must be accompanied by written findings, as follows:

A. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, such project that mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the completed EIR.

B. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdictions of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such other agency, or can and should by adopted by such other agency.

C. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR.

RDIER: SUMMARY (2.0)

ABSTRACT: Herewith is the RDEIR's Summary (2.0) in its entirety, including INTRODUCTION (2.1), SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION (2.2), ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED IN THIS RDEIR (2.3), ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE (2.4) and SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS (2.5). An excerpt of the two "significant and unavoidable" environmental impacts from TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION is presented.

2.0 Summary

2.1 INTRODUCTION

This summary provides a description of the proposed project, project alternatives, significant impacts, and mitigation measures identified during the environmental analysis. Responsibility for implementation of mitigation measures lies with the project applicant unless otherwise noted. This summary is intended as an overview and should be used in conjunction with a thorough reading of the EIR. The text of this report, including figures, tables, and appendices, serves as the basis for this summary.

2.2 SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project consists of the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property, a 1.252 acre parcel located in the Mission Trails Nature Preserve. No specific land use has been identified as part of the project. The project site is considered parkland and is zoned P-2 (Improved Parkland). Surrounding the property is an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) zoned P-1. This area plus the project site are all part of the City’s largest park, the Mission Trails Nature Preserve. The building on the property (the Flanders Mansion) is recognized as a historic resource and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. A full project description is provided in Section 3.0 of this RDEIR.

An EIR was prepared in August 2005 for the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property project. The EIR was adopted and certified by the City Council on September 22, 2005. This action was successfully challenged in Superior Court by the Flanders Foundation (Flanders Foundation vs. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (Mont. Co. Super. Ct. Case No. M76728)). The City was ordered to de-certify the EIR and rescind all associated resolutions related to the EIR. In response to the Court’s decision, this RDEIR has been prepared to include updates and revisions to the 2005 DEIR, as modified in the 2005 FEIR. This RDEIR has also been updated to provide an expanded impact analysis under CEQA, identify revised mitigation measures specific to project-related impacts, and provide additional information for clarification. A summary of the revisions is provided in each of the respective topical section as part of the introduction.

2.3 ALTERNATIVES EVALUTED IN THIS RDEIR

In compliance with CEQA, this RDEIR evaluates the comparative advantages and disadvantages of a range of project alternatives. The alternatives considered in the RDEIR are summarized below:

No Project: The No Project Alternative consists of retaining the site in its present condition. This would avoid all of the environmental impacts of the proposed project but would fail to meet the primary project objective of divestment of the Flanders Mansion property by the City.

Lease for Single-Family Residential Use: This alternative would consist of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea retaining ownership of the Flanders Mansion property and leasing the property as a single-family residence. This alternative assumes that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would implement some facility upgrades and maintenance requirements in order to comply with the Superior Court’s ruling. In additional, this alternative also assumes that the City, prior to the lease of the building, would implement additional facility upgrades to ensure that the Flanders Mansion is leasable. This alternative also assumes that exterior features, such as fencing, hedges, walls, gates, circulation patterns, and landscaping patterns may be made on the property to provide privacy to the future lessee and/or exclude the public from the property. Future terms of the lease agreement would be determined at the time a lessee was identified. This alternative assumes that the various conditions and mitigation measures identified in this RDEIR would be applicable to the future use of the property.

Lease for Public/Quasi-Public Use: This alternative would consist of the City retaining ownership of the Flanders Mansion property and subsequently leasing the facility to a low-intensity public/quasi-public use. The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea would still be responsible for implementing necessary facility upgrades and maintenance requirements in accordance with the findings of the Superior Court. Moreover, this alternative assumes that the City would be required to implement additional facility upgrades in order for the building to be leasable. Similar to the single-family lease alternative, this analysis assumes that some exterior improvements may be made depending on the type of public/quasi-public use. As a result, this alternative assumes that public access to and through the site could be restricted or significantly restricted. This alternative assumes that exterior changes, such as fencing or other exterior elements may be made as part of this alternative to accommodate the needs of a future lessee. While some limited public access may be permitted as part of daily operations or on a more limited basis such as special events, this analysis assumes access would be restricted under this alternative. Future terms of the lease agreement would be determined at the time a lessee was identified. A number of the mitigation measures that would be applied to the single-family residential use lease alternative would be applicable.

Sale with Conservation Easements and Mitigations: This alternative would consist of recording conservation easements on certain portions of the Flanders Mansion Property in order to minimize potential impacts to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum and a number of existing trails that would need to be reconfigured as a result of the proposed project. Specifically, this alternative consists of applying a conservation easement (or reducing the parcel size) over portions of the Lester Rowntree Arboretum that are located within the boundaries of the Flanders Mansion parcel. This alternative would also consist of recording an easement or reducing the parcel size along the eastern portion of the driveway to preserve existing trail access to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve (Serra Trail) and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum. A scenic/conservation easement covering the westerly/southwesterly boundary of the site to include areas bordering ESHA would be recorded to minimize potential biological impacts. The purpose of these easements would be to prevent a future property owner from erecting exterior elements or causing changes to the property within areas that are particularly sensitive, provide access to the Lester Rowntree Arboretum, and feasibly retain park benefits. These easements are intended to reduce and/or avoid significant impacts due to the permanent loss of parkland, ensure that park benefits associated with the Property are preserved, provide continued public use of certain portions of the property and protect environmental resources. The total land area covered by the easements would be approximately 0.5 acres. The total remaining area of the property under this alternative would be 0.752 acres and it is assumed that all conditions and mitigation identified in this RDEIR would be applicable. Figure 6.1-1 provides a graphical representation of the alternative parcel configuration and easements. Implementation of this alternative would retain existing park benefits associated with the Flanders Mansion Property to the maximum extent feasible, while still allowing the City to divest itself of the property. This alternative is not use-specific and therefore it is assumed that either a single-family or low-intensity public/quasi-public use could occupy the property.

2.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE

CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project be specified, if one is identified. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is intended to minimize adverse impacts to the project site and surrounding environment while achieving the basis objectives of the project. The “No Project” alternative could be considered the environmentally superior alternative because adverse impacts associated with project construction and operation would be avoided. Both the lease alternatives and the sale with easements and mitigation alternative would significantly reduce potential environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project. Although both lease alternatives and the sale with conservation easements and mitigation alternative would significantly reduce the extent of impacts as compared to the proposed project, the lease alternatives would avoid significant impacts to 1) park and recreation and 2) land use and planning by retaining the property. Consistent with the findings of the 2005 DEIR, as modified, the Lease Alternatives identified in this RDEIR are considered environmentally superior. If the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea determines that the lease alternatives are considered infeasible for specific economic, legal, social, technical, or other considerations, the sale with conservation easements and mitigations would therefore be considered the environmentally superior alternative that also meets the primary project objectives.

2.5 SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS

A summary of significant project impacts and mitigation measures are provided in Table 2-1. Mitigation measures have been identified to either avoid the impact or reduce the level of significance. The significance after mitigation implementation is also stated.

TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Excerpt of “Significant and Unavoidable” Environmental Impacts