2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01

Home Browse Search

HARBOR BLVD. MIXED USE TRANSIT CORRIDOR PLAN FINAL FIR CITY OF SANTA ANA 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project recreational facilities would occur at a slower pace due to reduced demand. Therefore, impacts related to recreation would be reduced under this alternative and would remain less than significant. 7.5.13 Transportation and Traffic Transportation and traffic impacts would be reduced in this alternative due to the 37- percent reductions in residential units and associated trips. Similar to the project, transportation and traffic impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant after implementation of mitigation. 7.5.14 Utilities and Service Systems Utilities and service systems impacts would be reduced by this alternative due to an overall reduction in residents. Fewer residents would generate less solid waste and wastewater, and would have reduced demand for water supplies. Impacts of the project related to utilities and service systems would remain less than significant. 7.5.15 Conclusion Ability to Reduce Impacts This alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Impacts to cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, and land use and planning would be similar to the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives This alternative would achieve most of the objectives of the proposed project. This alternative would achieve the following throe objectives to a lesser degree due to the 37 percent reduction in residential units: provide for new housing and mixed use development opportunities; create economic vitality by providing new opportunities for businesses and residents; and provide access to multi -modal transportation. 7.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires a lead agency to identify the "environmentally superior alternative" and, in cases where the "No Project" Alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed project, the environmentally superior development alternative must be identified. One alternative has been identified as "environmentally superior" to the proposed project: ■ Reduced Intensity Alternative The Reduced Intensity Alternative has been identified as the environmentally superior alternative. This alternative would lessen impacts associated with aesthetics, au quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. The remaining impacts are generally the same as the proposed project. Although October 2014 Page 7 -11