Laserfiche WebLink
the conclusion of this process. the City's Historic Resources <br />Commission held a public..-- J1..mon—, at which it conclusively <br />determined_ that there are no feasible preservation atteru atives for <br />the site. Despite that conclusion. City staff nevertheless in <br />response to a comment on the EIR - _ commissioned _an...additional <br />an dysis to study., a Historic Preservation Alternative. ,Tile Historic <br />Preservation Alternative would preserve the existing farmhouse <br />and ear ree. -c.n place and call for the Dreservation of some of the <br />trees on site ether with the plant ng ofadditional like kind <br />trees Historic Preservation <br />Alternative would avoid impacts to cultural resources, and would <br />constitute an environmentally- supgriior alternative. Upon receiving <br />and reviewing the additional analysis the applicant has-agreed to <br />Modify its development proposal to reflect the Historic <br />Preservation Alternative. By these actions, it is clear that the Citv <br />has proactive] encouraged ed tj>_e retention and reuse of historical <br />_ .... - <br />buildings -and sites as required by the ,a;Ar such 410 ; rotlfr^ ml [)Iojei <br />war d .air +llyd, W41-i City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use <br />Element Goal 4 and - Policv 4 2 . As m 4r, thk aftomative, 1lrril ar <br />hr,-- lur>�rHSer�IrrojtK't. wiflrCity of - Ssnt.t A -kul <br />(4un ravtl Plan Wirer! 44w, 0,➢ gmefi-4 Gill 4, Poke 472 - ,vhwh <br />IJE2l.flLda{ xC,s tlM1e r h�nik 11 m fd [CmjsL th -f dlr 4t4x if -iiiNi d( in-19 mid iw <br />Iii-mvrrvc,t, ,r, staW roe 0w, 01Y t+l S -s nl a n crlk.ral Plrrrr, La,trl <br />is,et t awl l are <br />subtcctlo ploj et r €,vsr,wa [Imm,dr tic City', re,v+ov, and li <br />x :; it air 41G,._vdo-l[ .F9 ,a- ra tv�alurtFel flilol1p1r Vlx, ,i y IeViewa <br />Willi 61t1d policie" of <br />i °Ln:t rr,lil s =, IAennr.tr't, <br />The text of Section 7.6.1, under the heading "Land Use and Planning" (Page 7 -14) <br />should be modified as follows: <br />The City Council adopted a resolution that listed the Sexlinger <br />Farmhouse and Orchard on the SARHP on June 4, 2012. The <br />action designated the site as "Key" as described in SAMC Section <br />30- 2.2(2)c. Followirn that designation, the property owners <br />proposed demolition of the on -site structures, which tiggered_an <br />open, public. and comprehensive process through which all <br />feasible preservation alternatives were thorou Ielly evaluated. An <br />ad hoc committee was formed, which members of the <br />City's Historic Resources Commission. City staff, members of the <br />public interested in preserving the site and representatives of the <br />property owners The committee and City staff explored <br />preservation options by_examining 28 different potential public <br />funding sources and actively soliciting interest in purchasin" the <br />property from no less than 19 private groups and organizations. At <br />the conclusion of this process. the City's Historic Resources <br />-8- <br />75A-94 <br />