My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
2011 -
>
2014
>
2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2014 10:54:14 AM
Creation date
11/18/2014 10:38:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
2014-069
Date
10/21/2014
Destruction Year
P
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
469
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HARBOR BLVD. MIXED USE TRANSIT CORRIDOR PLAN FINAL FIR <br />CITY OF SANTA ANA <br />7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project <br />7.2.1 Alternative Development Areas <br />CEQA requires that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are <br />capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project. The key question and first <br />step in the analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially <br />lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any <br />of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (Guidelines Sec. <br />15126[5][3][1]). In general, any development of the size and type proposed by the project would have <br />substantially the same impacts on air quality, land use/planning, noise, population/ housing, public services, <br />recreation, transportation /traffic and utilities /service systems. Impacts related to aesthetics, cultural <br />resources, geology /soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology /water quality and mineral resources <br />would need a site specific analysis to determine if another location would reduce impacts. These impacts were <br />found to be less than significant and less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Another location <br />would not avoid or substantially lessen the effects of the project. <br />The purpose of the project is to create a transit corridor plan and would enhance an underutilized area and <br />expand development opportunities that response to transit investments. The project area is served by a <br />number of existing and future transit opportunities. A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route, Orange County <br />Transportation Authority Route (OCTA) 543, began operating on Harbor Boulevard through the project site <br />in June 2013. An intercounty express bus route, OCTA 722, is scheduled to begin operation in early 2014 and <br />would serve the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Westminster Avenue at the north end of the project <br />site. A Santa Ana /Garden Grove Fixed Guideway transit project is planned that would pass just north of the <br />north site boundary. A second BRT route is planned on Edinger Boulevard that would cross Harbor <br />Boulevard 0.5 mile south of the project site (OCTA 2011). The recent and planned transit improvements <br />along this segment of Harbor Boulevard help create an opportunity for redevelopment of this largely <br />commercial corridor with mixed land uses. While the proposed transit improvements extend beyond the <br />project site, the above mentioned combination of transit improvements is unique to this segment of Harbor <br />Boulevard. Since other sites would not meet the basic objectives of the project they were not considered. <br />7.2.2 Reduced Nonresidential Intensity Alternative <br />At buildout of the proposed project, nonresidential development intensity would only be approximately one <br />percent greater than existing conditions. This change is not great enough to differentiate a reduced <br />nonresidential project from the proposed project. Furthermore, because the proposed project is intended to <br />permit development of a mixed use community on the project site, reducing permitted nonresidential <br />intensity would be contrary to objectives of the proposed project, including those objectives that advocate for <br />provision of new opportunities for mixed use development and businesses. Therefore, a reduced <br />nonresidential intensity alternative was considered but rejected. <br />October 2014 Page 7 -3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.