Laserfiche WebLink
impact 4" Street businesses, and cause residential displacement in the Santa Anita <br />Neighborhood of Santa Ana. In addition, they indicate opposition to the project for the <br />following reasons: Lack of inclusion in the planning process; 2. Questionable objectives for <br />the specified project; 3. Project costs; 4. Disruptive construction, vacant properties, <br />displacement; and 5. Public safety issues. They further requested that an equity analysis <br />(which is provided in Section 3.5 of the EA /DEIR) be performed. Along with their letter, <br />the SAC -BA also included over 180 form letters of opposition, most signed by residents <br />and representatives of business within the study area, some signed by individuals outside <br />the study area. <br />4.7.3 Summary of Public Agency Comments <br />Three agencies submitted comment letters during the public review period. A brief <br />summary of each is provided below: <br />California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) <br />Caltrans, as a commenting agency on the project, had no comments at this time. <br />However, in the event of any activity in the Department's right -of -way, they noted that an <br />encroachment permit would be necessary. They asked to be kept informed of the project <br />and any future development that might impact State transportation facilities. <br />California Native American Heritage Commission <br />The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conveyed their concern for CEQA <br />compliance with regard to areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, and suggested that <br />archaeological activity be coordinated with the NAHC and that the final report including <br />mitigation measures be provided to the NAHC planning department. <br />United States General Services Administration <br />The United States General Services Administration (GSA) provided comments on behalf of <br />the GSA and their Tenant Agencies in the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse, <br />located between 4`" and 5`" Streets, west of Ross Street. The GSA expressed a preference <br />for Streetcar Alternative 1 and strong objections to Streetcar Alternative 2. Their <br />objections to Streetcar Alternative 2 were based on security and operational concerns with <br />the 51" Street alignment. <br />Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society <br />The Santa Ana Historical Preservation Society (SAHPS) provided their comments on the <br />EA /DEIR in a letter dated July 7, 2014. Their primary concern was about potential right - <br />of -way acquisitions along Civic Center Drive to accommodate the streetcar in Streetcar <br />Alternative 2 and the planned bike lanes. They also expressed their support for Streetcar <br />Alternative 1 because they believe it will promote more visitors to Downtown Santa Ana <br />and reduce current vehicle and parking demands on the existing street system. <br />LPA Decision Report <br />July 2014 <br />55C -70 <br />4.11 1 Page <br />