Laserfiche WebLink
EXHIBIT A <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR, impacts associated with this issue <br />would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, pp. 4.11-33.) <br />9.15.4 Emergency Access <br />Threshold: Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-8; Initial Study, pp. 58-59.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Direct access <br />to the Project site is, and will continue to be, provided from N. Main Street and Edgewood Road, which <br />are adjacent to the Project site. In addition, fire lanes for emergency access are proposed for the northern <br />and western boundaries of the Project site. Construction activities would occur within the Project site and <br />would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the Project site or adjacent areas. In addition, travel <br />along surrounding roadways would remain open and would not interfere with emergency access in the site <br />vicinity. Moreover, the Project is required to design and construct internal access to conform to OCFA <br />standards to ensure adequate emergency access pursuant to the requirements in Section 503 of the <br />California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9) and the City of Santa Ana Fire <br />Code included as Municipal Code Chapter 14. (Initial Study, pp. 58-59.) <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and Initial Study, impacts <br />associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, pp. <br />58-59.) <br />9.15.5 Alternative Transportation <br />Threshold: Would the Project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public <br />transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-8; Initial Study, pp. 58-59.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project and would not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs <br />supporting public transit, bicycle, pedestrian or other alternative transportation systems. Notably, the <br />Project would not conflict with existing bus routes or sidewalks, and it would implement new onsite <br />sidewalks to connect to offsite sidewalks and onsite bicycle facilities. (Initial Study, p. 59.) <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and Initial Study, impacts <br />associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. <br />59.) <br />9.16.1 Utilities and Service Systems <br />9.16.1 Wastewater Treatment Requirements <br />Threshold: Would the Project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable <br />Regional Water Quality Control Board? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-8; Initial Study, pp. 63-64.) <br />Resolution No. <br />Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR <br />75E-85 <br />Page 47 of 71 <br />