80A - JOINT PH - TRANSIT ZONING CODE, FINAL EIR, SPECIFIC PLAN ETC. - ORIGINAL PACKET PROVIDED TO COUNCIL

Home Browse Search

Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives merely clarify and ar plif r the analysis presented in the EIR and do not trigger the need to recirculate per CHQA Guidelines 10.b. EM Findings on Measures Suggested in Comments ors the Draft EIR Several mitigation ineasures and alternatives -vvere proposed in public comments on the Draft 't JR. Findings for these naitigation measures and alternatives are provided belwwr. Findings on Mitigation Measures Proposed to Reduce Impacts to Cultural Resources m Proposed Mitigation Measure. Make the Lacy Neighborhood a special district based on its 1-iistorical character and proposed a Historic Neighborhood District, Consetiration or Preser %ration erla ► for the Lacy Neigl orl o d. ice `inal IR Chapter (Responses to ornt- ict is ), Letter from of f Dickman I , conmients JD-24, -27') -35,, and -45) Finding. The Agency finds that specific econolilLic , legal, social, technological, r other considerations make this mitigation measure infeasible. Rationale. *I'he Lacy nci 19 l boyhood has not been designated as historic, and there is no e-%Fi fence: that the creation of a historic district within the Lacy Neighborhood would reduce the significant impacts of the proposed project. Further, the creation of a Historic district Xvithin the Cite is a separate process requiring adoption of a local presenTation ordinance and cannot be accomplished through the CEQA process for the proposed project. (See Santa Ana IVIunicli3al Code, Part 11, Chapter 30.) 'Therefore, it is not feasible to adopt and implement this measure as part of the project. m Proposed Mitigation Measure. Create "Alaster Plan for the Pr senTation of Cultural Resources in the Transit Zoning Code Area" that identifies properties expected to be impacted by the project, the type of impact expected, and mitigation measures to deduce impacts to and avoid demolition of historic prop erties. (See Final El IR Chapter 3 (Responses to Cori - Tents), Letter; ftom Jeff Dicknia n UD), com ent D-26. Finding. The Agency finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations inake this r itigation measure infeasible. Rationale. Identification of the properties that would be impacted by the project, identi cati the type of impact expected, and identification of mitigation measures to reduce impacts and avoid. demolition of Iiistoric properties has already been c nduae l in the EIR. Specifically, 'Fable 4.4-2 (as modified in Filial EIR Chapter 2 lists all properties proposed for dernoliti n under the proposed Developer Project, and the analysis under Impact 4.4-3 explains that multiple studies have been completed that address many of the historic-age properties within the project area. I 2006, HRG conducted a reconnaissance- stale sunTe y and historic research project in support of the Santa Ana Renaissance Specific elan prepared by Xloule & Pol f oid HRG 2006). This project aimed to provide recommendations for lisst rie preser-�Tation planning oil about 400 acres, including many of the properties found within the Transit Zoning Code S project area. Subsequent prop erty-sp ecific studies - %vere conducted b y Jones and Stokes (2006 and 2007), which resulted in the full recordation and evaluation of man y of the properties \k4thin the Transit Zoning Code S project area. These evaluations included determinations of eligibility for the NRHP, CR IR, and the Santa Ana Register of Historic Properties S RHI . An additional historic resources memorandum for the record was then prepared for several properties in Santa Ana by Sap hos Environmcntal, Inc. This memorandum pro -Vided recommendations about the eligibility of 30 properties for inclusion in the S RII , (Refer to II , Appendix D.) Table 4.4-1 lists all 3-16 `transit Zoning Code SD EiR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations