2016-012 - California Environmental Quality Act

Home Browse Search

Statement as energy efficient power systems, drought tolerant landscaping, storm water filtration, and other LID requirements, The existing office portion of the onsite stricture world be retained, and the exterior renovated to provide a new fagade to be consistent with the new strictures that would be developed adjacent to the existing office stricture. This alterative would be consistent with the existing land use designation, which is PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) and M -1 (Light Industrial) zoning designation. Findings: The Light Industrial Business Park Alternative would result in a significant unavoidable impact for exceedance of GHG emissions thresholds, which would not occur by the proposed project. In addition, traffic impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The Light Industrial Business Park Alternative would also result in greater environmental impacts related to hazardous materials, operational noise, jobs - housing imbalance, and utilities and service systems. Although, this alternative would reduce operational air quality impacts to a less than significant level, the Light Industrial Business Park Alternative would not meet a majority of the project objectives. Environmentally Superior Alternative CEQA does not require the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) to approve the environmentally superior alternative. Conversely, CEQA requires that an EAR consider a reasonable range of feasible alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)) and then the lead agency may elect to approve the project or any of the analyzed alternatives. Pursuant to CEQA, this alternatives analysis has been prepared for the City to consider environmentally superior alternatives and also determine whether the benefits of the project or its alternatives outweigh the potential environmental impacts. Findings; The Environmentally Superior Alternative would be the No Project/No Build Alternative because no construction activities or intensification of onsite uses would occur, and it would reduce the significantly adverse impacts that would result. from the proposed project. The Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives would be the Reduced Project Alternative, which would involve reducing the build out of the proposed project by 25 percent. As a result, the overall impacts from implementation of the Reduced Project Alternative would be incrementally less than those of the proposed project. However, impacts related to long -term regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and intersection and roadway traffic impacts would exceed thresholds and would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Reduced Proj ect Alternative would result hr fewer vehicular trips and criteria pollutants, but would result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts that would result from the proposed project. The Heritage Mixed Use Project 43 ESA 1 140730 Statement of Facto and Findings September 2oi5