Item 28 - Public Hearing - Amendment Application for the Village Santa Ana Specific Plan

Home Browse Search

9 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES mixed -use development. However, this alternative would not maximize the opportunities to the same extent as the Project as described in the Project objectives to incorporate a mix of high - intensity office and residential living with experiential commercial uses as there would be fewer retail services and no office uses. Although this alternative would still provide new retail services and associated jobs, the fewer retail services would result in a net decrease of jobs from existing conditions and would not complement the South Coast Metro area with a diversity of new housing in a jobs -rich environment as strongly as the Project. (Draft Supplemental EIR, p. 6-21.) Findings: The City Council rejects Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternative, on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative fails to meet the basic Project objectives to the same extent as the proposed Project; and (2) the alternative fails to avoid or reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts relating to recreation. 9.2.3 Alternative 3: Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative The Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative would reduce residential and commercial uses and remove office space to minimize operational impacts to volatile organic compounds associated with area sources and avoid the construction -related impacts related to ground disturbance required for subterranean parking (i.e., excavations below 14 bgs). Alternative 3 would reduce the number of residential units to 1,000 units, the total commercial area to 25,000 square feet, and the publicly accessible parks/recreation facilities and open space to 6.8 acres. This alternative would not include the proposed subterranean parking level and associated excavation activities and would reduce the overall length and magnitude of construction phasing. Alternative 3 would construct two surface parking lots and a three -level parking garage in addition to the podium parking levels within the residential buildings. To support Alternative 3, a parking garage would be added to Block D (located in the northern central portion of the project site), and surface parking would be added to Blocks F and H (located in the eastern central portion and the center of the project site, respectively). The total amount of parking stalls would be reduced to 1,500 stalls, and the total amount of bicycle stalls would be reduced to 96 stalls. (Draft Supplemental EIR, p. 6-21.) Environmental Effects: The Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative would result in a reduced magnitude of impacts related to construction activities and resulting area and depth of ground disturbance. As such, construction impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, noise, and tribal cultural resources would be reduced. However, as with the Project, impacts would still be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation, but residual impacts would be less when compared to those of the Project. During operation, the Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative would be expected to result in reduced emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs, energy consumption, vehicle miles traveled, overall population, and demand for public services and utility services. The Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative would provide 6.8 acres of publicly accessible parks/recreation facilities and open space, resulting in a higher recreation -to -resident ratio of 2.8 acres per 1,000 residents than the Project. However, significant and unavoidable impacts to recreation would remain. Although the volume of impacts would be reduced by the Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative in comparison to the Project, the Reduced Project with No Subterranean Parking Alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable recreation impacts or the less than significant impacts of the Project. (Draft Supplemental EIR, pp. 6-27 — 6-28.) City of Santa Ana The Village Santa Ana Specific Plan Project August 2025 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations W.