HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-090RESOLUTION NO. 87~0
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA ANA TO SUPPORT THE ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' DECISION TO LOCATE A
DETENTION AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN
GYPSUM CANYON.
WHEREAS, In 1983, after five years of extensive analysis,
research and input from the community, the Orange County Board
of Supervisors adopted a major corrections needs assessment
update and master plan; and,
WHEREAS, Subsequent to the Master Plan, four significant
actions have been initiated to execute the plan including the
designation of Gypsum Canyon as the site of a detention and
correctional facility for post sentenced inmates; and,
WHEREAS, The Gypsum Canyon jail site is remote from densely
populated areas and over $550,000 has already been expended in
evaluating the site including an Environmental Impact Report,
public hearings and feasibility studies; and,
WHEREAS, The County expects to spend more than $3 million
this current fiscal year on jail construction at the Gypsum
Canyon Site; and,
WHEREAS, The Gypsum Canyon site is nearly two miles away
from the closest residence and all urban sites considered in
Santa Ana would be approximately one block from the nearest
residential neighborhood or school.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana supports the Orange County Board of
Supervisors decision to resolve overcrowding in County jails by
locating its long term correctional facility in Gypsum Canyon.
ADOPTED this 16th day of November, 1987.
429
ATTEST:
H. Y~, Mayor
g~er~fe O~' t ~YCou[c i 1~
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Acosta A e
Griset ~
Hart ~ye
May Ave
McGuigan Aye
Pulido Ave
Young Aye
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
E dwarff~ . C~O0 er,
Attorney
RES. NO. 87-91
433
A. Elimination of physical blight;
B. Creation of new employment opportunities;
Ce
Encouragement of uniform and consistent land use
patterns;
Encouragement of private commercial/industrial
rehabilitation, development and capital investment;
E. Implementation of the General Plan;
Encouragement of the highest and best use of
available land consistent with the General Plan;
Improvement of traffic flow along the South Main
Street commercial corridor;
Ho
Improvement of market potential through creation of
a uniform commercial character;
I. Increase availability of off-street parking;
Development of vacant or under-utilized industrial
land;
Ko
Replacement of public streets, alleys, parks,
sidewalks, sewers, storm drains, traffic signals,
lighting systems, and other public facilities and
improvements as necessary; and
Provision of services necessary for the daily
operation of proposed residential and
office/commercial environments to be provided
within the Project site.
SECTION 3: Findings and Facts in Support of Findings for
Significant Environmental Effects of the Project.
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines ("Guidelines") promulgated
pursuant thereto provide:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for
which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more
significant environmental effects of the project unless the
public agency makes one or more written findings for each of
those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation
of the rationale for each finding.
The possible findings are:
-3-
RES. NO. 87-91
Changes or alterations which have been
required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Such changes or alterations are within
the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the
agency making the finding. Such
changes have been adopted by such other
agency.
Specific economic, social or other
considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final
EIR (Guidelines, Section 15091).
The EIR prepared for the Project identifies several potential
environmental effects and developed and identified a variety of
mitigation measures which will minimize the potential adverse
effects of the Project. All feasible measures are being
included as conditions of Project approval. As discussed
below, with the exception of long term air quality impacts,
water usage impacts and agricultural depletion, these
mitigation measures will reduce all environmental effects to a
level of acceptability, both for the Project specifically and
on a cumulative basis.
INSIGNIFICNT EFFECTS
Based on information contained in the Initial Study prepared by
the Planning Department for the Project (the "Initial Study")
and the EIR, the following were found to have no significant
impact on the environment.
1. The Initial Study identified certain impacts as
having no adverse environmental effects and/or having no
significance. Such insignificant effects, as identified in the
Initial Study are geologic features/structures, water bodies,
air movement, substantial reduction in groundwater, exposure of
people or property to water hazards, endangered plant or animal
species, risk of upset, and cultural resources.
2. The EIR identified certain effects which, although
not listed as insignificant in the Intial Study, were found to
be insignificant in the EIR. Such insignificant effects, as
identified in the EIR are as follows:
A. Infill of an undeveloped site in an
urban setting.
-4-