Item 32 - EIR No. 2020-03 and GPA No.2020-06 Santa Ana General Plan Update

Home Browse Search

VI. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires that an EIR include a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that would "feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives" (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6[a]). As discussed above, the PEIR identified significant impacts in a number of categories. The following impacts could be mitigated below a level of significance: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, tribal cultural resources impacts. The following impacts cannot be mitigated below a level of significance: certain air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, noise, population and housing, and recreation impacts. The PEIR analyzed four alternatives to the proposed project that could reduce some, if not all, of the impacts. A. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING "Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts" (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6[c]). Alternative Circulation Element—Roadway Classifications.The proposed circulation element in the GPU evolved over a long process and coordination with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). During this process, alternative packages of arterial roadway classifications were considered that involved roadways in OCTA's Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). The majority of reclassifications proposed were identified for bicycle facility safety improvements in the City's Safe Mobility Santa Ana (SMSA) Plan, prepared in 2016. Most of the reclassifications identified were for roadways where bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements would require roadway reconfiguration and a reduction in the number of existing or planned travel lanes. Many of the SMSA recommendations across the city have already been, or are in the process of being, implemented along arterial roadways without reducing the number of lanes. A cursory review of two optional roadway reclassification packages was conducted to determine whether these optional plans would have the potential to eliminate significant impacts of the proposed GPU and meet most the project objectives. It was determined that a detailed evaluation of this alternative was not needed to provide a reasonable range of EIR project alternatives. Transportation/traffic impacts of the proposed project were determined to be less than significant (VMT/SP falls below the significance threshold for the GPU without mitigation). Although these alternatives may have some potential to reduce VMT (by reducing the number of travel lanes for some roadways) and thereby also potentially reduce air quality, greenhouse gas, and traffic noise impacts, these alternatives would also result in more inconsistencies with the MPAH and result in more traffic congestion. Although traffic congestion is no longer a CEQA consideration, the GPU sets forth standards for level of service that will be considered by decision-makers. Moreover, the Santa Ana General Plan Update CE 5T ac an Statement 32 — 78 2 Of ri ing onsiderations -55- 61 /Rer�0 2 1