|
Finding. The City Council rejects the Reduced Intensity Alternative on the basis of policy and
<br /> economic factors as explained herein. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines,
<br /> § 15364; see also City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; California
<br /> Native Plant Soc. v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.AppAth 957, 1001; Sequoyah Hills
<br /> Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland(1993) 23 Cal.AppAth 704, 715.) Specific economic, legal,
<br /> social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities
<br /> for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative identified in the Final
<br /> Recirculated PEI R.
<br /> This alternative would result in similar impacts to 7 impact categories, reduce impacts to 12
<br /> categories, and increase impacts to 1 category. Impacts would be similar for aesthetics,
<br /> agricultural resources, biological resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and
<br /> water quality, mineral resources, and wildfire. This alternative would decrease impacts to air
<br /> quality, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, noise,
<br /> population and housing, public services, recreation, tribal cultural resources, transportation, and
<br /> utilities and services. It would be expected to increase land use and planning impacts relative to
<br /> the GPU. As with the GPU, impacts to air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions,
<br /> noise, population and housing, and recreation would remain significant and unavoidable. Overall,
<br /> impacts under this alternative would be decreased in comparison to the proposed project.
<br /> The Reduced Density Alternative reduces the level of development for two of the five focus areas
<br /> (55 Freeway/Dyer Road and South Bristol Street) relative to the GPU. No other changes to the
<br /> GPU are made for this alternative. It is assumed to include the same General Plan policies and
<br /> would not modify the circulation element or related improvements. Therefore, this alternative
<br /> would attain many of the project's objectives. It would not "optimize" high density housing and
<br /> mass transit opportunities, and so was found not to attain objective No. 2. It would, however,
<br /> achieve objectives Nos. 3 through 5, but to a lesser extent than the proposed GPU. With the
<br /> reduced opportunities in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road and South Bristol focus areas, it would not
<br /> be as effective in providing affordable housing opportunities, and may not be as economically
<br /> feasible in terms of funding community benefits. It would provide mixed-use opportunities that are
<br /> bike and pedestrian friendly and provide opportunities for live-work, artist spaces, and small-scale
<br /> manufacturing.
<br /> 2020 RTP/SCS Consistency Alternative
<br /> (Reduced development for RTP/SCS population/housing consistency) This alternative was
<br /> developed to evaluate an update to the General Plan that would be consistent with the population
<br /> and housing projections used to develop the Southern California Association of Governments'
<br /> (SCAG) most recent Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy
<br /> (RTP/SCS)—Connect SoCal (adopted May 7, 2020). Connect SoCal is a long-range visioning
<br /> plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public
<br /> health goals. The plan embodies a collective vision for the region's future and is developed with
<br /> input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, nonprofit
<br /> organizations, businesses, and local stakeholders in the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles,
<br /> Santa Ana General Plan Update
<br /> CE 5T ac an Statement 32 — 81 2
<br /> Of ri ing onsiderations -58- 61 /Rer�0 2 1
<br />
|