P & D CONSULTANTS - 2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Grand Avenue Widening Project Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary ■ Traffic: Alternative 2 is environmentally superior to the No Project Alternative because it improves the project segment of Grand Avenue consistent with the General Plan and MPAH designation for this road segment and with existing and forecasted demand, similar to the benefits that would occur under Alternative 1. ■ Noise: Alternative 2 is environmentally superior to the No Project Alternative related to long term traffic noise because Alternative 2 includes mitigation of traffic related noise which would not be mitigated under the No Proj ect Alternative. Based on the qualitative summary in Table ES -3, the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative because it does not result in the property acquisition and displacement, erosion, short term air quality and short term noise impacts which would occur under Alternatives 1 and 2. However, the No Project Alternative is not consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element and would not provide the increased traffic capacity needed on the project segment of Grand Avenue. The No Project Alternative would also not provide the on street bike lane designated in the City's Bikeway Master Plan. Table ES -1, provided earlier, summarizes the unavoidable significant adverse impacts under Alternatives 1 and 2. As shown in Tables ES -1 and ES -3, Alternative 1 would be environmentally superior to the No Project Alternative because it would be consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Major Arterial designation and it would result in beneficial long term effects related to air quality, noise and traffic compared to the No Project Alternative. Alternative 1 would be environmentally superior to Alternative 2 because it results in the acquisition of fewer parcels and the displacement of substantially fewer residents. However, Alternative 1 would not be consistent with the General Plan Bikeway Master Plan. Alternative 2 would also be environmentally superior to the No Project Alternative because it would be consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Major Arterial designation and the City of Santa Ana Bikeway Master Plan, and it would result in beneficial long term effects related to air quality, noise and traffic compared to the No Project Alternative. Alternative 2 would not be environmentally superior to Alternative 1 related to land use, population and housing because Alternative 2 would result in the acquisition of more parcels and the displacement of more residents than Alternative 1. For the remaining unavoidable adverse impacts, Alternatives 1 and 2 are essentially the same, with neither being environmentally superior to the other. In summary, the No Project Alternative would not be environmentally superior because it does not meet defined project goals to implement the Circulation Element Major Arterial designation and the City's Bikeway Master Plan for the project segment of Grand Avenue. Alternatives 1 and 2 would be superior to the No Project Alternative because they would meet the project goal to implement the Circulation Element Major Arterial designation and would meet the other defined project goals. ES.6 PROJECT OBJECTIVES As discussed in detail in Section 1.2 (Project Objectives), the objectives of the proposed Grand Avenue are to: F.•IPROJ-ENMGrand eirWew Text - GrandlExecutive Summary-new.doc Page ES -17