02/07/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Henk Huetink, Santa Ana resident, spoke in opposition of demolition and the concept of building ahigh-rise in downtown Santa Ana. Jo Ann Ramirez, Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society, stated the January 3, 2002 minutes did not reflect her comments and read a prepared statement from the Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society. She asked that the Commission "hold over the public comments forum" until the EIR is out. Roberta Reed, Santa Ana resident, had expected her entire comments from the January 3, 2002 meeting to be reflected in the minutes. She read a letter she wrote to the Commission and requested that it be a part of the public record. She expressed concern regarding the demolition permit and that the project may not appropriately follow the CEQA process. Discussion followed about the City's policy of only taking action minutes at all Board meetings. Madam Chair Kings asked the City Attorney if there is another format to include detailed comments. Kylee Odette, Deputy City Attorney, stated she would discuss the policy regarding minutes with the City Clerk. Mr. View stated that written comments would be placed in the demolition request file and would not be reflected in the minutes. Ben Grabiel, Santa Ana resident, asked the Commission to reject the request to demolish these buildings and for another site to be found that would fit Mr. Harrah's requirements. Madam Chair Kings closed the public comments. In response to Commission comments, Mr. View stated staff is not taking individual comments but capturing the spirit of the comments and the concerns are clear to staff. Encouraged the Commission to pass. on to the Planning Commission and City Council all mitigation measures they favor. ' Commissioner Giles asked for a review of the demolition process. Mr. View explained Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) Section 30-7 and stated that at the end of the process, the property owner is entitled to demolish the property. In this case as there is a project in place, the City Council has. more leverage of mitigation as these structures are tied to a project but that the applicant is legally entitled to demolish the buildings and will be allowed to do so. If the EIR states there are unavoidable adverse impacts with the project, City Council could still approve the project (with their findings and statement of overriding consideration) stating the positive impacts outweigh the negative impacts. Madam Chair Kings asked for staff to research the feasibility of Cabrillo Park Tennis Center as a relocation site, and noted that at the last meeting she asked staff to look at the feasibility of doing a third structural report on the Yale Apartments. Charles View spoke with the Building Official regarding the demolition permit that has been issued. There is nothing at this point to reconsider. Mr. View will ask the Building Official to prepare a response in writing at Madam Chair Kings's request. Motion to continue the public hearing to March 7, 2002. MOTION: Giles SECOND: Richardson AYES: Bustamante, Chinn, Corpin, Gartner, Giles, Kings, O'Callaghan, Richardson, Schaefer (g) NOES: None (0) ABSENT: None (0) ABSTENTION: None (0) It was the consensus of the Commission that they would like to generate a document listing their recommendations and forward it to City Council before the public hearing. They wish to formulate a response that would summarize possible mitigation measures, and include comments and feelings of their constituents. They would need at least two meetings, and possibly have to call a special meeting. HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES 5 FEBRUARY 7, 2002