Davis, CA – This week, the city of Davis released the Draft EIR for the 1800-unit Village Farms project located west of Pole Line and north of Covell Blvd. The public will have 45 days now to provide comments on the Draft EIR. (Click here to read the full Draft EIR).
The project requires discretionary approvals and ultimately would require a Measure J vote of the people—right now penciled in for November 2025.
The DEIR analyzed five project alternatives: No Project (No Build) Alternative; Lower Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative; Agricultural Resource Preservation Alternative; Higher Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative; and Off-Site Project Alternative.
The lower number alternative “would consist of the development of 1,395 dwelling units, including 210 affordable housing units, on the same development footprint as the Proposed Project and BRPA, consistent with the applicant’s original application for the Proposed Project. This represents 405 fewer units than currently proposed.”
This was the original configuration, but the EIR notes, “In response to early feedback from the Davis City Council, the number of units was increased to a total of 1,800, which now represents the Proposed Project evaluated throughout the Draft EIR.”
With the agricultural resource preservation alternative, “the same land uses would occur, but on a reduced development footprint that would avoid, to the extent feasible, conversion of on-site high-quality agricultural land with non- agricultural uses. Unlike the Proposed Project, the Agricultural Resource Preservation Alternative would not include buildout of the approximately 20.3-acre Heritage Oak Park and Educational Farm and would not include the development of the 470 RMD units within the Central Village and Parkside Village East. “
This alternative would include 1330 residential units—470 fewer than the Proposed Project.
Meanwhile, the higher number of units would have 2700 residential units.
The DEIR notes, “The 2,700-unit count was selected for the Alternative in order to reduce per capita VMT below both City and regional average VMT thresholds.”
In terms of environmentally superior alternatives, “The No Project (No Build) Alternative would be considered the Environmentally Superior Alternative, because the project site is assumed to remain in its current condition under the Alternative. Consequently, none of the impacts resulting from the Proposed Project would occur under the Alternative.”
However, the no build alternative “would not meet any of the project objectives.”
In analyzing the other options, the Higher Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative would “would meet all project objectives” and in fact, would satisfy “Project Objectives 1, 2, and 7 to a greater extent than the Proposed Project.”
Further, “the Higher Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative would result in fewer impacts than the Proposed Project related to transportation; specifically, the significant and unavoidable project impact related to conflicting or being inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines.”
The DEIR concludes, “Overall, the Higher Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative is the only alternative that eliminates the Proposed Project’s significant and unavoidable VMT impact. Thus, Higher Number of Units – Same Footprint Alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative.”
Given that some community members have already objected to project size, it is worth noting that the lower density project was evaluated as having greater impacts and the higher density projects was evaluated as having lesser impacts than the proposed project.
The DEIR also considers 19 areas of controversy—among the most interesting will be increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT}. Traffic concerns were a primary reason for the defeat of the 2005 Covell Village project.
If anything, traffic impacts along the corridor have only increased in the last 20 years—however, many will point out that a significant factor is that of people living in Woodland, traveling along Road 102 to and from UC Davis and the City of Davis.
