Laserfiche WebLink
333 <br /> <br />The proposed project is consistent with the City of Santa Ana <br />General Plan, Open Space, and Parks and Recreation goals and <br />objectives. The proposed development will have a positive impact <br />on limited resources for the improvement of existing parks in the <br />City of Santa Aha. <br /> <br />2. FINDINGS <br /> <br />The mitigation measure contained in the Mitigation Monitoring <br />Program as Mitigation Monitoring Program Number 158 has been <br />required in, or incorporated into, the project even though no <br />significant adverse environmental effects are expected. <br />Substantial evidence supporting this finding is contained in the <br />record at page 4-155 of the Revised Draft EIR and Response to <br />Comments 16-KK, 16-LL, 16-MM, 21-E. <br /> <br />W. CULTURAL RESOURCES <br /> <br />ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS <br /> <br />Implementation of the project may have an impact on unknown <br />archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or historical <br />structures and sites, as Santa Aha is an archaeologically sensitive <br />area. This is supported by the presence of recorded surveys and <br />excavation sites adjacent to the project area which generally have <br />similar characteristics. Additional inference for the likelihood <br />of discovering cultural resources comes from the proximity of the <br />Santiago Creek site. There is potential for the existence of <br />archaeological resources on-site which have not been discovered. <br />Grading and redevelopment activities may destroy any cultural <br />resources remaining within the project site and mitigation measures <br />may need to be observed to properly preserve these resources. <br /> <br />2 · FINDINGS <br /> <br />The mitigation measure contained in the Mitigation Monitoring <br />Program as Mitigation Monitoring Program Number 159 has been <br />required in, or incorporated into, the project and that mitigation <br />measure mitigates or avoids the significant environmental effects <br />identified in this EIR and outlined above. Substantial evidence <br />supporting this finding is contained in the record at page 4-157 of <br />the Revised Draft EIR. <br /> <br />VI. INFEASIRILITY OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />SUMMARY: The Revised Draft EIR evaluates the comparative merits of <br />a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, which could <br />feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project. The Revised <br />Draft EIR evaluates the required "No Project" alternative, a <br />reduced density garden office alternative, an alternative that <br />replaces the single-family attached housing and the high-rise <br /> <br />33 <br /> <br />0 <br />0 <br /> <br />0 <br /> <br />0 <br /> <br /> <br />