My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
80A - TRANSIT ZONING CODE - FEIR - SUPPLEMENTAL - REPONSE TO COMMENTS
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2010
>
06/07/2010
>
80A - TRANSIT CODE AND STATION DISTRICT - FULL PACKET LISTED INDIVIDUALLY
>
80A - TRANSIT ZONING CODE - FEIR - SUPPLEMENTAL - REPONSE TO COMMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 4:08:36 PM
Creation date
10/8/2010 4:16:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
80A
Date
6/7/2010
Destruction Year
P
Notes
supplemental EIR Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Chapter 12 Responses to Comments Received Since Publication of the t=tnal EIR <br /> City of Del Ma~• v. City of San Diego [1982] 133 Cal.App.3d 401) Refer to the City/Agency's Findings on <br /> iVlitigation Measures Proposed to Reduce Impacts to Cultural Resources in the Findings of Fact and <br /> Statement of Overriding Considerations for a further discussion. <br /> Response to Comment BHLG-5 <br /> This comment appears to reference Figure 5-1 (Demolitions) contained on p. 5-6 of the Recirculated <br /> Chapter 5 (Alternatives) of the EIR. The comment states that "at least 10" of the structures identified in <br /> Figure 5-1 should be rehabilitated in place, if feasible, or moved within the Lacy Neighborhood. The <br /> comment does not specify which structures should be rehabilitated or moved. Note that there are a very <br /> limited number of designated historic resources in the Lacy Neighborhood (see Draft EIR Figure 4.4-1 <br /> [Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties within the Transit Zoning Code Area]), and the <br /> neighborhood itself has not been designated as historic. Additionally, mitigation measure MM4.4-3 <br /> <br /> would reduce impacts to historic resources throughout the Transit Zoning Code Area to the extent <br /> feasible. Preservation of ten of the existing structures proposed for demolition in the Lacy <br /> Neighborhood is not feasible because it will inhibit the City`s ability to meet its affordable housing goals. <br /> Construction of affordable housing units is critical to meeting the City`s Regional Housing Needs <br /> Assessment (RHNA) for 2006-2014, and the Cit~r has an adopted policy to "maximize affordable housing <br /> on Agency-owned properties that is of high quality, sustainable, and available to various income levels." <br /> (Refer to Santa Ana Housing Element [2006-2014], Policy HE-2.8.) Additionally, preservation of certain <br /> properties within the Lacy Neighborhood may inhibit the City`s ability to "encourage the construction of <br /> rental housing for Santa Ana`s residents and workforce, including a commitment to very low, low and <br /> moderate income residents and moderate income Santa Ana workers" (Policy HE-2.3) and to fulfill its <br /> policy to "facilitate and encourage a diversity and range in types, prices, and sizes of housing, including <br /> single-family homes, apartments, town homes, mixed/multiuse housing, transit-oriented developments, <br /> and live/work housing" (Policy HE-2.4). (Refer to Santa Ana Housing Element [2006-2014].) Further, <br /> preservation of all of ten of the existing structures proposed for demolition in the Lacy Neighborhood <br /> would be inconsistent with the primary objectives of the proposed Developer Project to "redevelop all of <br /> the Agency-owned properties" and "provide new affordable housing for families in furtherance of the <br /> Cit<-'s affordable housing goals established in the Housing Element, the Implementation Plan for the <br /> Santa Ana Merged Redevelopment Project Area, and the City of Santa Ana Consolidated Plan." The <br /> infeasibilit<~ of Alternatives 4, 5 and 6 is discussed in the City/Agency's Findings Regarding Project <br /> Alternatives in the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. <br /> Response to Comment BHLG-6 <br /> It is unclear from this comment what is meant by the properties not having been "inspected." All of the <br /> properties currently owned by the Redevelopment Agency have been inspected numerous times to <br /> determine their safety and suitability, as well as to allow for the salvage of architectural details by <br /> volunteer groups. Most recently the properties were inspected for purposes of determining estimated <br /> rehabilitation costs that were used in Appendix J, the Keyser Marston Analysis, which analyzed the <br /> economic feasibilit<- of Alternatives 4, 5, and 6. Further, the properties identified for demolition on <br /> parcels currently owned by the Agency have been the subject of "windshield" surveys to determine their <br /> potential eligibilit~r for listing as a historic resource. (Refer to Draft EIR Section 4.4 and Appendix D.) <br /> Specifically, in 2006, HRG conducted areconnaissance-st5rle survey and historic research project in <br /> City of Santa Ana Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B) EIR 12-23 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.