| Section 10. Impacts on Visual/Aesthetic and Architectural Conditions |
A complete project description is essential for defining impacts and possible mitigation. Projects impacts such as Land Use compatibility, geology, fiscal, infrastructure, traffic, water & air, visual, biological, construction, etc. cannot be fully assessed with the project definitions and plans currently provided. Refer to Section 1. Project Description.
At issue here is the proposed project's compatibility with the design and community character of El Granada. The Burnham Plan of 1906 shows the east Granada parcel (the proposed housing site) as a single purpose parcel, that is, railroad serving: South Granada freight station and train yards. The Burnham Plan did not include streets or housing on this parcel.
Today, El Granada School occupies the site of the South Granada freight station (photo p. 101 "Granada"). The horse pasture occupies the site of the proposed round house, train yards and power plant.
Granada's street design reflects the best of Burnham's thinking about urban design. Two world famous Burnham city plans, which in part look similar to the Granada Plan, are the San Francisco Plan of 1905 (never implemented) and the Chicago Plan of 1909 (partially implemented.)
The proposed Mirada Surf project would be tacked onto the classic 1906 Burnham street plan of arcs and radials. This would be the first time that the Burnham street plan would be breached. See page 59 "Granada" for Burnham street plan as built.
Parklands and scenic backdrops were a prime component of any Burnham plan. In Granada Burnham achieved these components with the 2,000-foot beach front corridor, the 640-acre hillside park, boulevard medians and train station plazas. Burnham invented the term "park chains" to describe linked park areas. Today we would say "greenbelts." Refer to 3.1.a Historical Land Uses and Section 14. Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural Sites
The idea of the proposed project area as housing with suburban infrastructure (streets, lighting, etc.) conflicts with the original Granada plan for this section of the community. If the use of this parcel was originally intended as an open field work and service area, and has since adapted to a open space/community park area, then the proposed project would seem to be incompatible with the original concept of community integration.
The surrounding residential areas in El Granada feature mostly older "owner-built" homes - meaning houses that were individually constructed, either by local builders or by the original owners, with very few instances of similar housing styles group together. Many of the original 2500 sq. ft parcels have been merged to create larger building lots, or retained for very small cottages. The result is an eclectic mix of housing sizes and styles that contribute to an individual-based community character for the surrounding neighborhoods. The arcing street layout focuses its spokes toward the central commercial areas and seems to encourage taking meandering routes through the town (considering the near impossibility of getting anywhere through town in a straight line). This design lends itself to an interesting flowing together of neighborhoods, each block with a private feeling to it yet well connected with the rest of town.
Of concern is that the housing in the proposed project would be of a singular style, with minor variations as to orientation, color, number of rooms, etc., and that also this collection of singular style houses, along with the limited access in and out of the development area and un-integrated street plan would create an isolated community, essentially cut-off and separate from the rest of the El Granada neighborhoods. The owners/applicants have expressed that these would be larger homes, and with the conditions of the PUD (Planned Unit Development) still undefined, we must assume worst-case that these could be houses up to 36' tall with 60% lot coverage.
Direct visual impact from various sites around the area need to be considered. In particular (but not limited to) the EIR should examine following the visual impacts of the proposed project:
These should be assessed in terms of the specific project, the project in accumulation to all other planned projects in the near future (1 - 10 years), and the cumulative impact of project's potential precedent setting use of low density lands for higher density development.
| 10.1. Precedents and Consequences |
| 10.2. Mitigation |