2007-026 - Approving the Final Environmental Impact

Home Browse Search

Chapter 3 FIndings Regarding Project Alternatives · Alternative 2-Higher Intensity Commercial Project: Tbis alternative would permit a illgher intensity of commercial development and a corresponding decrease in residential density for projects proposed within the Overlay Zone relative to the proposed overlay plan, In general, this alternative would reduce the number of residences and increase employment opportunities as a result of more commercial/office uses in the area. · Alternative 3-Reduced Project: Tills alternative would allow development at a maXlffium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1,25 for each developable parcel within the Overlay Zone without a consideration of the residential density (du/ac). The anticipated mix of commercial, office and residential land uses would be identical to the proposed project, however, a maximum FAR ratio would be established that would limit development potential. Under tills alternative, there would be no differentiation between different areas (districts) of the Overlay Zone. . Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Evaluation As the Overlay Zone is designed to guide the development of a particular portion of the City, an alternative site would not be appropriate as an alternative to the proposed project, Other land uses such as complete residential would not acilleve the objectives of the proposed project and could result in incompatibility with adjacent land uses. An all-residential development would not attract a wide range of activities to maintain a dynamic environment for the Overlay Zone or promote the image of a gateway to the City of Santa Ana. Therefore, these alternatives were rejected from further analysis in the EIR because they do not meet the objectives of the proposed project listed above, Finally, under the no project alternative analysis~ there is no discussion of a no project alternative with a freezing of conditions (i,e" no development). Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126,6(a), the no project alternative for a land use plan analyzes the continuation of existing land use plans into the future, Analysis of a no project Ino development alternative is more appropriate for analyzing specific development projects, . Alternative 1: No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative (Continuation of Existing General Plan) Implementation of the No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative would represent the continuation of the City's cxisting General Plan and zoning designations to guide furure growth and development within the project area, The majority of the Overlay Zone is zoned Professional, For this alternative, impacts would be analyzed under a maximum buildout scenario with1n the project area with the allowed land uses and development standards designated in the existing General Plan and zoning designations. Tbis alternative is considered environmentally superior in certain issue areas (per the CEQA Guidelines) but would also result in similar environmental impacts to the proposed project in other areas, Implementation of Alternative 2 would result in lesser environmental impacts than the proposed project with respect to Aesthetics, Land Use, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Transportation, and Utilities and Service Systems due to the lesser level of development and/or changes to existing land uses that would occur witilln the Overlay Zone, Impacts with respect to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. and Hydrology and Water Quality would result in impacts similar to the proposed project under tills alternative. I (SG811:Hl8R J I ..&':":., A Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone EIR Rndlngs of Fact/Statement of OVerriding Considerations Page 55 of 66 3-3