My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 32 - EIR No. 2020-03 and GPA No.2020-06 Santa Ana General Plan Update
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2022
>
01/18/2022 Regular & Special SA
>
Item 32 - EIR No. 2020-03 and GPA No.2020-06 Santa Ana General Plan Update
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2023 2:43:13 PM
Creation date
8/16/2023 2:43:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
32
Date
1/18/2022
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.
/
319
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
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the <br /> Final Recirculated PEIR. <br /> This alternative would result in similar impacts to 11 impact categories, reduced impacts to 5 <br /> environmental impacts, and increase impacts to 4 categories. Impacts would be similar for <br /> agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, <br /> hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, noise, tribal <br /> cultural resources, and wildfire. This alternative would reduce impacts for aesthetics, population <br /> and housing, public services, recreation, and utilities and service systems. Impacts to air quality, <br /> greenhouse gas emissions, land use and planning, and transportation would increase. This <br /> alternative does not mitigate any of the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the <br /> GPU to a less than significant impact. It would also exceed the City's VMT threshold. Overall, <br /> impacts under this alternative would decrease in comparison to the proposed project. <br /> The No Project/Current General Plan alternative would not achieve many of the proposed project <br /> objectives. The existing land use plan does not provide the opportunities to provide housing and <br /> employment at the levels required to meet local and regional goals. Moreover, the No Project <br /> alternative would not provide numerous general policies as included in the GPU to achieve these <br /> goals and invigorate communities. The current General Plan, however, protects established <br /> neighborhoods and several Specific Plans and Special Zoning areas would provide for infill <br /> opportunities, protect established neighborhoods, and result in mixed-use villages and bike- and <br /> pedestrian-friendly communities. <br /> Reduced Intensity Alternative <br /> (Reduced capacity for the 55 Freeway/Dyer and South Bristol focus areas) Under the GPU, the <br /> only areas that include revisions to land use designations to accommodate new growth are within <br /> the five focus areas. The majority of remaining growth would occur within previously approved <br /> Specific Plans and Special Zoning areas. A nominal amount of growth is assumed to occur in <br /> other areas of the city and would not require land use amendments. The Reduced Intensity <br /> Alternative would substantially reduce development capacity within two focus areas, 55 <br /> Freeway/Dyer and South Bristol Street, which accommodate approximately 65 percent of the <br /> housing unit growth and 72 percent of the nonresidential use (by building square footage) of the <br /> growth projected for the combined focus areas under the GPU. For the focus areas, the forecast <br /> buildout is based on development at approximately 80 percent of the maximum allowed <br /> development for each respective land use designation. For this alternative, development of the <br /> 55 Freeway/Dyer and South Bristol focus areas would be reduced to approximately 50 percent of <br /> the maximum allowed per the land use designations. This alternative would reduce housing units <br /> by a total of 5,383 and would reduce total building square footage by approximately 4.2 million <br /> square feet distributed between these two focus areas. This alternative would also reduce <br /> population by 19,825 and jobs by 9,184. Overall, this alternative would reduce the housing growth <br /> accommodated by the GPU land use changes by approximately 18 percent and reduce <br /> nonresidential building square footage by approximately 27 percent. <br /> Santa Ana General Plan Update <br /> CE 5T ac an Statement 32 — 80 2 <br /> Of ri ing onsiderations -57- 61 /Rer�0 2 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.