RES 12493 - Laserfiche WebLink

5.Responses to Comments at the Public Hearing on the Draft EIR making bodies during project development review. The mitigation in the Draft SEIR, including the HABS/HAER documentation,would not limit the input the City will have on the potential loss of a historic resource,but is intended to lessen the potential loss of a historic resource through adopted industry practices. Planning Commissioner Phil Blank Comment: Questions whether or not taking a picture of a historical resource and subsequently removing that resource was an adequate mitigation. Response: Although the recording of a historic structure would eliminate one adverse impact of demolition(the loss of historical information),it would not prevent the physical loss of a historically significant resource. HABS, HAER and Historic American Landscapes Survey (HALS)are programs of the National Park Service aimed at creating a detailed record of historical buildings and structures. HABS/HAER recordation can include architectural drawings, large format photography in accordance with HABS/HAER specifications, historical research, and written reports in both short format and outline format. This form of mitigation is standardized, and although it would not reduce the impact of the physical loss, it does provide record. The physical loss of a historic structure would remain a significant and unavoidable impact. Comment: Concern that someone may interpret the mitigation for historical resources to mean that it is okay to remove a historical resource without future discretionary review. Response: As stated on page 4.0-15 of the Draft SEIR and page 2-5 of the Final SEIR, a project applicant for Sites 6 and 21 would be required to implement Mitigation Measure 4.D-1 b if a structure on site is determined to be historically significant. Recording would ensure a permanent record of the present appearance and context of the historical resources. Under this mitigation proposal,the project applicant would ensure that the historical resources to be demolished would be recorded to HABS/HAER standards prior to any construction activities. The HABS/HAER documentation would be filed with the State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO),the HABS/HAER collection in the Library of Congress,the University of California Bancroft Library,the Planning Division,and the City of Pleasanton Library. As noted above,although recording of a structure would eliminate one adverse impact of demolition(the loss of historical information),it does not prevent the physical loss of a historically significant resource. A proposed project would be required to undergo design review during the project application phase.The City Council would determine whether or not the physical historic resource would be preserved as part of the decision made on a site-specific development proposal. Design features and conditions of approval could also be established at the time of project review. Depending on the findings of the historic evaluation,additional conditional of approval could include: • Architectural Resource Interpretive Display and/or Interpretive Material. The project applicant would develop a display or interpretive material for public exhibition and General Plan Amendment and Rezonings 5-2 ESA 1210016 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report December2011