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 Boulevard Mixed Use Transit Corridor Plan <br />Findings and Facts in Support of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations <br />6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES <br />A. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE <br />SCOPING /PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS <br />The following is a discussion of the land use alternatives considered during the scoping <br />and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis <br />in the DEIR. <br />Alternative Development Areas <br />CEQA requires that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or <br />its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects <br />of the project. The key question and first step in the analysis is whether any of the <br />significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting <br />the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen <br />any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR <br />(Guidelines Sec. 15126[5][6][1]). In general, any development of the size and type <br />proposed by the project would have substantially the same impacts on air quality, land <br />use /planning, noise, population /housing, public services, recreation, transportation /traffic <br />and utilities /service systems. Impacts related to aesthetics, cultural resources, <br />geology /soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology /water quality and mineral <br />resources would need a site specific analysis to determine if another location would <br />reduce impacts. These impacts were found to be less than significant and less than <br />significant with mitigation incorporated. Another location would not avoid or substantially <br />lessen the effects of the project. <br />The purpose of the project is to create a transit corridor plan and would enhance an <br />underutilized area and expand development opportunities that response to transit <br />investments. The project area is served by a number of existing and future transit <br />opportunities. A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route, Orange County Transportation Authority <br />Route (OCTA) 543, began operating on Harbor Boulevard through the project site in <br />June 2013. An intercounty express bus route, OCTA 722, is scheduled to begin <br />operation in early 2014 and would serve the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and <br />Westminster Avenue at the north end of the project site. A Santa Ana /Garden Grove <br />Fixed Guideway transit project is planned that would pass just north of the north site <br />boundary. A second BRT route is planned on Edinger Boulevard that would cross <br />Harbor Boulevard 0.5 mile south of the project site (OCTA 2011). The recent and <br />planned transit improvements along this segment of Harbor Boulevard help create an <br />opportunity for redevelopment of this largely commercial corridor with mixed land uses. <br />While the proposed transit improvements extend beyond the project site, the above - <br />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 <br />not considered. <br />2. Reduced Nonresidential Intensity Alternative <br />At buildout of the proposed project, nonresidential development intensity would only be <br />approximately one percent greater than existing conditions. This change is not great <br />enough to differentiate a reduced nonresidential project from the proposed project. <br />42 July 2014 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.