Laserfiche WebLink
Threshold: Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral <br />resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? <br />Finding: No impact. (DEIR, p. 2-7; Initial Study, p. 47.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: No active mining operations exist in the City of Santa Ana. The mapping <br />by the California Geological Survey does not indicate that any significant mineral deposits are present <br />within the City. The Project area is developed with urban office uses and has no history of mining. <br />Implementation of the Project would not cause the loss of availability of mineral resources valuable to the <br />region or state. Moreover, the Project site and its surrounding vicinity is not in or near a mining site <br />identified by the City of Santa Ana General Plan. (Initial Study, p. 47.) <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts <br />associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. <br />47.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the Modified Project. <br />9.12.0 Noise <br />9.12.1 Long Term Noise <br />Threshold: Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels <br />in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 4.8.17 through 4.8-22.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: While the Project's operation would generate some traffic -related noise, <br />such noise would not constitute a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project <br />vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Pursuant to the Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit H to the <br />DEIR), the Project would generate an increase of less than one dBA CNEL on the study area roadway <br />segments, which is less than the relevant threshold. For the reasons discussed above and the reasons <br />discussed in the DEIR, impacts associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation <br />is required. (DEIR, p. 4.8.17 through 4.8-22.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the <br />Modified Project. <br />9.12.2 Public Airports <br />Threshold: For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been <br />adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people <br />residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? <br />Finding: No Impact. (DEIR, p. 2-7; Initial Study, pp. 49-50.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 <br />miles of an airport. The closest airport to the Project site is John Wayne Airport, which is located over 6 <br />miles to the south of the Project site. In addition, the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located approximately <br />9.35 miles to the northwest of the airport. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or <br />working in the Project area to excessive noise levels related to airports. (Initial Study, pp. 49-50.) <br />Resolution No. Page 45 of 76 <br />Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR <br />