Laserfiche WebLink
highways. The GPU would also create new sources of light or glare in the project area, but <br /> adverse impacts would be minimized with compliance to building codes. <br /> (b) Biological Resources: Development pursuant to the GPU would not impact riparian habitat <br /> or other sensitive natural communities. Additionally, the GPU would not impact wetlands and <br /> jurisdictional waterways. The GPU would not conflict with an adopted NCCP/HCP as the City <br /> is not within a NCCP/HCP area and would not conflict with local policies or ordinances <br /> protecting biological resources. <br /> (c) Cultural Resources: The likelihood that human remains may be discovered during clearing <br /> and grading activities is considered extremely low. In the unlikely event human remains are <br /> uncovered, impacts would be less than significant upon compliance with California and <br /> Safety Code Section 7050.5. <br /> (d) Energy: Implementation of proposed policies under the GPU, in conjunction with and <br /> complementary to regulatory requirements, will ensure that energy demand associated with <br /> growth under the GPU would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Additionally, the <br /> GPU would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy <br /> efficiency. <br /> (e) Geology and Soils: The plan area's location and underlying geology make it likely to <br /> experience seismic hazards, including strong seismic ground shaking, and secondary <br /> hazards, like liquefaction. No active surface faults are mapped and zoned under the AP <br /> Zoning Act in the plan area. Additionally, all structures that would be constructed in <br /> accordance with the GPU would be designed to meet or exceed current design standards as <br /> found in the latest CBC. Most of the plan area is within an area susceptible to liquefaction; <br /> however, all structures constructed under the GPU would be designed in accordance with <br /> current seismic design standards as found in the CBC. There are no substantial hazards with <br /> respect to slope stability, as the plan area is mostly flat. Unstable geologic unit or soils <br /> conditions, including soil erosion, could result from development of the GPU. Mandatory <br /> compliance with existing regulations, including the preparation and submittal of a SWPPP <br /> and a soil engineering evaluation, would reduce soil erosion impacts to a less than significant <br /> level. Implementation of the CBC design code, which has been adopted by the City and <br /> requires that structures be designed to mitigate expansive and compressible soils, would <br /> reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The probability of subsidence impacts is <br /> generally low in the majority of Santa Ana; however, the statutorily required sustainable <br /> groundwater management practices of the Orange County Water District would ensure that <br /> impacts would be less than significant. Future development in the plan area would require <br /> connection to the City's sewer system as the City of Santa Ana does not allow for the <br /> installation of septic tanks. <br /> (f) Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The GPU would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, <br /> or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. <br /> Santa Ana General Plan Update <br /> CE 5T ac an Statement 32 — 45 2 <br /> Of ri ing onsiderations -22- 6c /Rer�0 2 1 <br />