Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-25 CRA . . REL :adg-9 06/05/86 RESOLUTION NO. 86-25 I A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND URBAN VENTURES CORPORATION AND MC MAHAN'S FURNITURE ASSOCIATES. WHEREAS, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Ana is engaged in activities necessary to ex- ecute and implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Santa Ana Redevelopment Project; and . WHEREAS, in order to implement the Redevelopment Plans, the Agency proposes to sell certain real property in the Project Area, pursuant to the terms and provisions of that certain "Disposition and Development Agreement" between the Agency and Urban Ventures Corporation and McMahan's Furniture Associates, which is on file in the office of the Executive Director of the Agency, in which said real property (hereinafter referred to as the "Site") is described; and WHEREAS, Urban Ventures Corporation has submitted to the Agency a written offer in the form of said Agreement to purchase the Site; and WHEREAS, the proposed Agreement contains all the provisions, terms, conditions and obligations required by state and local law; and WHEREAS, Urban Ventures Corporation possesses the qualifications and financial resources necessary to acquire and insure development of the site, in accordance with the purposes and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan; and t WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared, reviewed and con- sidered a Summary Report setting forth the cost of the Agreement to the Agency, the estimated value of the interests to be con- veyed determined at the highest uses permitted under the Re- development Plan, and the purchase price, and made said sum- mary Report available for public inspection in accordance with the California Community Redevelopment Law; and . WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Redevelopment Law, the Agency and the City Council have held a duly noticed joint public hearing on the proposed sale of the Site and the proposed agreement; and RESOLUTION NO. 86- 25 PAGE TWO NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Agency has considered all the terms and conditions of the proposed sale and hereby finds and determines that the redevelopment of the Property pursuant to the said Agreement is in the best interest of the City and the health, safety and welfare of its residents, and is in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable state and local laws. 2. The said Agreement is hereby approved, and the Chair- man of the Agency is hereby authorized to execute the said Agreement and the Grant Deed pertaining thereto. 3. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to take all steps, and to sign all documents and instruments necessary to implement and carry out the said Agreement on behalf of the Agency. 4. The "Environmental Findings, Park Place Apartments Development (A-12 Development Site)", attached hereto as Exhibit A, is incorporated herein by reference, and approved and adopted by the Agency. The Executive Director is directed to implement all mitigation measures set forth in the final Supplemental Impact Report for the Park Place Apartments Development. 5. The approval of the said Agreement by the Agency, as hereinabove set forth, is conditional upon the approval of the sale of the Site upon the terms and conditions contained therein by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana. ADOPTED this 17th day of by the following vote: ------ June ,1985, AYES: MEMBERS: Acos~a, Johnson, Luxembourger, McGuIgan and Young MEMBERS: None NOES: ABSENT: MEMBERS: Griset a:w Daniel E. Chairman Griset . . I . i . . . . . . EXHIBII A ' REL:k-5 06/05/86 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PARK PLACE APARTMENTS DEVELOPMENT (A-12 DEVELOPMENT SITE) A. The Santa Ana Redevelopment Agency and the City Council of the City of Santa Ana have considered the Environmental Impact Report for the Santa Ana Redevelopment Project as adopted in 1973 and amended jn 1975 ("Project EIR") and a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("SEIR") prepared for the proposed "Park Place Apartments" development on the "A-12" development site prior to approving the "Disposition and Development Agreement" between the Redevelopment Agency and Urban Ventures Corporation for such development and the adoption of Specific Development Plan No. 39 for such development. B. The Project EIR is adequate for approval of the said Disposition and Development Agreement and said Specific Development Plan, except for discussion of impacts on historic resources, and an additional environmental impact is necessary only for such discussion of impacts on historic resources, for the following reasons: (1) Implementation of the Agreement and the Specific Development Plan does not represent any change in the Redevelopment Project; nor does it involve any new significant impacts other than those considered in the Project EIR except for historic impacts; (2) No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Redevelopment Project is undertaken which involve any new significant impacts not considered in the Project EIR, except with regard to historic impacts. (3) Except for historic impacts, no new information of substantial importance has become available which shows that the Redevelopment Project will have any significant effects not discussed in the Project EIR; nor that the significant effects will be substantially more.severe t~an shown in the Project EIR; nor that any mitigatIon measures or alternatives exist which would be feasible and would substantially reduce any significant effect of the Redevelopment Project but were either not considered in the Project EIR or found not to be feasible. .,.._- ""'. "-r '. I. . . . ENVI RONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PARK PLACE APARTMENTS Page two C. The SEIR complies with the California Environmental Quality Act with regard to addressing the impacts of the Disposition and Development Agreement on historic resources. D.. The demolition of structures located on the develop- ment site is not deemed to be a significant effect for reasons set forth in the SEIR. Nevertheless the Redevelopment Agency will lessen the impact of such demolition through the preparation and maintenance of a photgraphic record and an historic structures report as recommended by the SEIR. E. The visual impact of the new development on nearby historically valuable buildings is not deemed to be significant for reasons set forth in the SEIR. Nevertheless the Redevelopment Agency will lessen the impact of the development through a variety of measures as follows: (1) The impact on the Minter House of that portion of the new development directly to the south of the Minter House has been reduced by modifications to the site plan and building elevations which increases the distance between the Minter House and the new development, preserves several tall trees in such intervening area, and somewhat reduces the height of the new development at its closest point to the front of the Minter House. . (2) The Redevelopment Agency will preserve or relocate historically valuable streetlights and street trees as recommended in the SEIR. (3) The Redevelopment Agency will review and approve or disapprove proposed material and colors for building exteriors in the new development to promote compatibility with nearby historically valuable structures, as recommended in the SEI R. F. The Redevelopment Agency will conduct a monitoring program to avoid or substantially reduce the risk of adverse impacts on nearby structures due to construction noise or vibration, as recommended in the SEIR. G. The Redevelopment Agency will consult with the local American Indian community to mitigate any possible adverse impact on bural sites or other cultural resources, as recommended in the the SEIR. H. To mitigate cumulative effects, the Redevelopment Agency shall continue its efforts to assist rehabilitation of historically valuable buildings, as recommended in the SEIR. . . . . . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PARK PLACE APARTMENTS Page Three I. The alternative of "no project" is not feasible because it fails to promote the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the downtown area. An important part of such plan is to develop new housing in the downtown area to support the retail establishments there and to generally oppose blighting influences. J. The redesign options discussed in the EIR are all infeasible because they all require the number of dwelling units to be reduced to the point where the development becomes economically infeasible, thus becoming the equivalent of the "no project" alternative. Various other factors render each redesign alternative infeasible for reasons set forth in the SEIR. K. The proposed development of the site will assist in the revitalization of the downtown area, especially through attracting more people to live in the downtown area. These considerations override the slightly adverse impacts of the development.