93-036 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

32,6 the proposed project. The level of enhancement of Santiago Park would be reduced because there would be fewer developer contributions. Most importantly, this alternative would not fully attain the city of Santa Ana's basic objectives with respect to the proposed project. For example, the alternative would not result in the preferred mix of land uses, and tax revenues would not be maximized for the city. Infrastructure improvements for the surrounding areas would take place at a reduced level or not at all. The reduced level of development could not support the same level of exactions being provided by the project as proposed. No benefits from mixed-use commercial and residential uses combined on-site would occur. Thus, while the alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed project, this alternative would not attain the city's basic objectives with respect to the proposed project because it is not mixed use. [Revised Draft EIR, pp. 6-10 to 6-17, and Appendix F, p. 111] ALTERNATIVE LAND USE (ALL OFFICE) (ALTERNATIVE C) FINDINGS Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR. 2. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THE FINDIN(t: The Ail office Alternative would alter the proposed project by removing the single-family attached housing and the high-rise residential tower (a total of 280 units or 427,660 square feet of residential uses) and replacing them with the two 92,000 square foot 2-story office buildings. These low-rise office buildings would be located on the eastern third of the project site (the location of the residential uses is on the western half of the proposed project) and would be surrounded by landscaping to create a garden-like business environment. The office, retail and other commercial uses on the western half of the site would remain the same as that proposed. The project would total 1,634,950 square feet: 817,125 square feet for Phase I and 817,825 square feet for Phase II. It would have a FAR of 2.3. Many environmental impacts of this alternative would be similar to those expected from the proposed project. Grading and geological impacts associated with the development of this alternative would be similar in intensity and extent as those anticipated with the proposed project. Because the amount of grading is similar, the amount of fugitive dust emissions associated with this alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project. Impacts on surface drainage and groundwater recharge would be about the same 36