3 - The Bowery - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Bowery Mixed-Use Project CEQA Findings of Fact City of Santa Ana 60 May 2020 Evaluation of Alternatives Alternative 1 – No Project/No Build Alternative The No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable air quality, greenhouse gas, and transportation impacts that would occur from the Project and all of the potential construction impacts. Additionally, operational impacts would be reduced and mitigation measures would not be required, which include measures related to hazards and hazardous materials, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. However, the environmental benefits of the Project would also not be realized, such as improvements to storm water quality, removal of contaminated soils, improvements to the jobs/housing balance, and the potential to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The No Project/No Build Alternative would not install storm water filtration features in accordance with DAMP and LID design guidelines that would filter and slow the volume and rate of runoff; the contaminated soils would remain onsite; and this alternative would provide for the projected employment growth but would not improve the jobs to housing balance within the region and could generate more vehicle miles traveled. The No Project/ No Build Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. The site would not be redeveloped to provide housing to help meet the region’s demand for housing, would not provide a development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC, would not develop housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance, would not provide onsite uses that reduce VMT, and would not implement SCAG RTP/SCS policies related to providing additional housing near employment centers. Overall, this alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed Project Finding: The City of Santa Ana finds that the No Project/No Build Alternative is infeasible based on several economic and social factors. The site would not be redeveloped to provide development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC, would not develop housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance, would not provide onsite uses that reduce VMT, and would not implement SCAG RTP/SCS policies related to providing additional housing near employment centers. Overall, the No Project/No Build Alternative fails to meet any of the Project objectives (Draft EIR at p. 6-12) and is rejected on that basis. Alternative 2 – Reduced Project Alternative The Reduced Project Alternative would result in 3,955 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project. The reduction in vehicular emissions and consumer products from this alternative would reduce operational air quality impacts to a less than significant level. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions and transportation would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Additionally, the mitigation required for implementation of the proposed Project would continue to be required for the Reduced Project Alternative to reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials and tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level. Overall, although the volume of impacts would be less by the Reduced Project Alternative in comparison to the proposed Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would not eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project or eliminate the need for mitigation. Furthermore, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in a reduced beneficial impact. Providing fewer multi-family units and less commercial space on the Project site would result in fewer opportunities to improve the jobs-housing balance as fewer residents would have the potential to travel to local employment opportunities. 3-82