AgdaPkt 2011-10-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 59 ATTACHN�NT 3 Ms. Skousen replied that if the draft EIR is certified, and a statement of overriding considerations is adopted by the city council or planning commission, that would be the end point. She stated it would be when the Planning Commission makes the final decision on whether the benefits of the project outweigh saving the historical resource, and at that point they can decide on whether the sign needs to be mitigated. Ms. Riordan clarified that in order to be mitigated the sign would either need to stay on the property or be relocated and visible from EI Camino. Commissioner Bondonno asked for clarification on whether the sign would need to stay on EI Camino in order to be mitigated. Ms. Riordan replied yes. Ms. Riordan noted it could be relocated to another roadway but that would not reduce it to a less-than-significant impact per CEQA. Commissioner Bondonno asked if one of the findings included in the approval of the draft EIR could be that the sign would need to be moved off EI Camino Real. Commissioner Schmidt asked if the potential for a historic resource is state or local. He asked that if it does become a historic resource, if they would be tearing down a historic resource. Ms. George stated that it is eligible for the California register, and if the sign were removed, it would not be officially listed unless the owner of the sign moved to do so. She stated that for CEQA purposes it is a significant resource but it is not officially listed unless someone took the steps to do that. She noted there would be no repercussions for the loss of the sign. Commissioner Schmidt asked if there would be any litigation problems. Ms. George replied no. Chair Borgens asked if the sign could be stored temporarily. Ms. Ekas replied that that option is being explored. The mitigation measures on page 62 of the draft EIR describe a stepped process of an approach to mitigation for the resource. She stated it is quite typical and if saving it is not feasible, then moving it is an option, et cetera. She noted that a conservative conclusion must be taken at this point, which is to say it is a significant impact. She stated that the statement of overriding considerations could be prepared. She stated that it is possible that the sign could simply be moved and there won't be a significant unavoidable impact. Chair Borgens asked when this will be brought back before the commission. Ms. Riordan stated that the public review period has been extended to October 26th and staff will come back before the commission in late fall or early winter with the final EIR, including responses to comments, and the plan development permit, vesting tentative map and condo permit.. Page 7 of 16