My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-11-20_AGENDA PACKET
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
Planning Commission (2002-Present)
>
2020
>
05-11-20
>
05-11-20_AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/9/2020 9:57:00 PM
Creation date
11/9/2020 9:54:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PBA
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
327
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />The Bowery Mixed-Use Project CEQA Findings of Fact <br /> <br />City of Santa Ana 56 <br />May 2020 <br />SECTION VII <br />RESOLUTION REGARDING ALTERNATIVES <br />The City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it has considered and rejected as infeasible the <br />alternatives identified in the EIR and described below. Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA <br />Guidelines requires an EIR to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project, or to the <br />location of the Project, which could feasibly achieve most of its basic objectives, but would avoid or <br />substantially lessen any of the significant effects identified in the EIR analysis. An EIR is not required <br />to consider every conceivable alternative to a proposed project. Rather, an EIR must consider a <br />reasonable range of alternatives that are potentially feasible; an EIR is not required to consider <br />alternatives that are infeasible. In addition, an EIR should evaluate the comparative merits of the <br />alternatives. Therefore, this section sets forth the potential alternatives to the Project analyzed in <br />the EIR and evaluates them in light of the objectives of the Project, as required by CEQA. <br />Objectives <br />The following objectives have been identified in order to aid decision makers in their review of the <br />proposed Project and its associated environmental impacts. <br />• Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs new multi-family residential units, which would <br />help meet the region’s demand for housing. <br />• Transform an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent with <br />other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and Irvine Business Complex <br />(IBC) and combines residential uses with community-serving retail near employment <br />opportunities, freeway access, and transit. <br />• Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, <br />sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and provide non-vehicular (pedestrian and <br />bicycle) circulation. <br />• Develop a mix of housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance. <br />• Provide onsite uses that reduce vehicular miles traveled (VMT) by providing an internal <br />pedestrian circulation system that links residential uses, recreation areas, and <br />retail/commercial areas onsite. <br />• Implement the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy <br />(RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to population and housing by providing additional <br />housing near employment centers. <br /> <br />Alternatives <br />Key provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines relating to the alternatives analysis (Section 15126.6 <br />et seq.) are summarized below: <br />• The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the Project or its location that are <br />capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the Project, even if <br />these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the Project objectives or <br />would be more-costly. <br />3-78
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.