|
Chapter 9 Flndings Regarding ProJeot Afternatlves
<br />HE-2.3 Rental Housing. Encourage the construction of rental housing For Santa Ana's
<br />residents and u>orkforce, including a comtnittnent to ~•eiq low, low, and moderate
<br />income residents and moderate income Santa 11na workers-
<br />HE-2.4 Diversity of Housing Types. Facilitate and encourage a diversity and range in types,
<br />prices, and sizes of housing, including single Famil}• homes, apartments, town
<br />homes, mixed/multiuse housing, transit-oriented developments, and li~'e/work
<br />housing.
<br />Alternatit'e 3 would not meet the projecc's transit oriented objecti~*es to the same extent as the proposed
<br />project. Reducing the amount of housing and retail space ~~•ould result in a Failure to Fully emphasize the
<br />use of the SARTC for City residents. A [Wised-use urban and transit-oriented neighborhood requires a
<br />critical mass and balance between residential and non-residential uses. (Draft EIR, Section 5.5.)
<br />Alternati~'e 3 would not pro~•ide that critical mass and balance.
<br />Reducing housing and retail opportunities would result in a failure to fully beaefiC from the ins*esttnent in
<br />the expansion of the ta~nsit system and would not adequately target growth in housing, employment, and
<br />cotaitzzercial de~•elopmetit within walking distance of [he existing and planned transit stations. In addition,
<br />Altcrnati~'e 3 would not implement SCAG 12TP and RCI' policies or established General Plan Land Use
<br />Element policies 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.G, 1.7, 1.9, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, •1.3, 4.4, 4.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.7, 5.9, 5.10,
<br />and 5.11, or Urban Land Use Element Goals 1 through 7 to the extent that the proposed project would.
<br />(See Land Use Element; Urban Desigta Element; Draft EIR Table 4.7-3.) Specificall}-, Alternative 3
<br />would not meet the following SCAG RTP Land Use Goals to the same extent as the proposed project:
<br />~ Cxeate mixed-use districts or "complete communities" in strategic growth areas through a
<br />concentration of activities «~th housing, employment, and a this of retail and services, located in
<br />close proximity to each other. Focusing a mix of land uses in su~ategic growth areas creates
<br />complete conzmututies wherein most Bail}• needs can be met ~i'itlain a short distance of home,
<br />prot'iding residents with the opportunit}' to patronize their local area and run dail}' errands by
<br />walking or c}'cling rather traveling b}' automobile.
<br />~ Intensify nodes along corridors with people-scaled, mixed-use de~'elopments. Dian}' existing
<br />corridors lack the residential and conitraercial concentration to adequntel}' support non-auto transit
<br />uses, without which the existing transit system cannot fully realize its potential for accommodating
<br />additional trips and relieving the transportation system. These nodes along the corridor also create
<br />vibrant, walkable comnntnities with localized access to amenities, further reducing reliance on the
<br />automobile For a variety of trips.
<br />~ Pedestrian-Friendly environments and more compact dec•elopment patterns in close pro_vanity to
<br />transit ser~'e to support and impro~-e transit use and ridership. Focusing housing and employment
<br />growth in transit-accessible locations through this transit-oriented development approach will
<br />serve to reduce auto use and support more multitnodal tsa~•el beha~'ior.
<br />Additionall}•, the seduction in retail space under Alternative 3 would reduce potential new employment
<br />opportunities, and the economic bene£ts that accompan}' such opportutities, as compared to the
<br />proposed project. It would also reduce the amount of potential tar revenue [Fiat the City could use to
<br />reinvest and stimulate economic de~•elopment.
<br />Resolution No. 2010-024
<br />Page 74 of 130
<br />3-8 Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) EIR Flndings of Faot/Stetement of Overriding Conslderatlons
<br />
|