2017-046 - Approving Addendum Nos. 1 and 2

Home Browse Search

Santa Ana/Garden Grove Fixed Guideway Project Addendum #2 area. Since the certification of the EIR, there have been no changes to the aesthetic environment of the Project as evaluated in the EIR. However, as described under "Description of Design Modifications" there is an additional design modification resulting from 60% design development that has been determined to potentially affect visual resources, and therefore further visual analysis evaluation was performed to address the revised location of TPSS unit 4 at SARTC. In order to address the potential visual quality impact associated with the proposed new location of TPSS unit 4, a supplemental visual impact analysis was prepared (see Visual Impact Analysis Re-evaluation Technical Memo Update, Appendix A). The purpose of the analysis was to identify any changes to visual effects that were previously disclosed in the EIR. The supplemental visual impact analysis update concludes that no new significant visual impacts and no increase in the severity of an impact would result as compared to the Project as evaluated in the EIR. No additional visual quality impact would occur and the conclusions that the Project would not result in a significant visual quality as identified in the EIR remain accurate. Cultural Resources In July of 2016, HDR performed a cultural resources technical analysis re-evaluation in response to advancements in engineering by the OCTA Project. The purpose of that 2016 analysis was to identify whether any of the proposed minor design modifications to the adopted Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) would affect the previous findings regarding cultural resources (both historic and archaeological) within the previously -approved Area of Potential Effects (APE), and the revised APE to reflect design modifications. That updated cultural resources analysis confirmed that the proposed engineering refinements to the Project did not change the previous conclusions regarding cultural resources and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommended that there would be no adverse effects within the expanded APE under NEPA and a less than significant impact would remain the finding for the design modifications within the expanded APE under CEQA. The sensitivity of the area for archaeological resources and the recommendation for archaeological monitoring to be conducted for earth -disturbing activities that could encounter previously undisturbed soils remained unchanged and consistent with the 2015 EA/EIR. On October 14, 2016, the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred with the findings of that Cultural Resources Technical Memo Update (OHP reference number FTA111011B, see Appendix B, Attachment A). In regard to the revised APE, the SHPO noted that "the APE should include the entirety of individual resources and historic properties located within it. As shown on sheet 4 of 15 of the APE, only part of the Pacific Electric Railroad Bridge (P-30-161847) is located within the APE. The APE should be expanded to include the whole property." The Project has since advanced with the completion of the 60% design. OCTA, as the agency responsible for design and implementation of the Project, is again proposing minor design modifications to the adopted LPA comprised of four physical and operational improvements. The design modifications were reviewed against their potential to affect the previous findings regarding cultural resources (both historic and archaeological) within the previously -approved APE, and, where necessary, the APE was revised to reflect these design modifications. An update to the cultural resources technical analysis re-evaluation was completed (see Appendix B). Physical improvement 1) The track shift occurs within the existing APE and there are no previously identified cultural resources in this area east of the SAR Bridge. As such, this proposed design modification does not directly or indirectly affect the existing cultural resource findings since it will not have a visible and/or audible or atmospheric impact or vibration impacts from construction on any previously identified historic property, nor necessitate a change in the APE. Physical improvement 2) The change of TPSS unit 4 location is to a new location within the existing APE limits (within APN 398-351-04, Sheet 15 of 15 of the APE map). The TPSS sites for the Project are described as small mundane utilitarian elements intended to match the existing setting within the APE. The TPSS sites would be visually consistent 71 Page 1170726.1