My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FULL PACKET_2005-02-22
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2005
>
02/22/2005
>
FULL PACKET_2005-02-22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2015 10:25:28 AM
Creation date
2/16/2005 1:43:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
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.
/
586
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
<br />City Place <br />Focused Environmental Impact Report <br /> <br />Findings and Facts in Support of Findings <br /> <br />project site were considered, but the level of impact would remain comparable, As a result, an <br />alternative site for the City Place project was not evaluated in the EIR, <br /> <br />6.2 NO PROJECT AL TERNA TIVES <br /> <br />6.2,1 No ProjectlExisting Conditions Alternative <br /> <br />This No Project Alternative assumes that the existing uses on the 17.7 acre project site are retained <br />and that no development occurs on the site. With this Alternative, the site would remain vacant and <br />no residential or commercial uses would be developed on this site, Table 9-1 from the EIR, on the <br />following page, indicates that the No ProjectlExisting Conditions Alternative would not meet any of <br />the City or applicant objectives for the City Place project. <br /> <br />6.2.2 No ProjectlExisting Entitlement Alternative <br /> <br />This No Project Alternative assumes that the approximately 17,7 acre project site would be <br />developed consistent with the existing approved entitlements for the project site which would allow <br />for the development of the previously approved Main Street Concourse Project consisting of up to <br />1.96 million square feet of office, retail and hotel uses, and 280 residential units, The existing <br />entitlements for the project site reflect approved development as assessed in City of Santa Ana EIR <br />90-2 which was certified by the Santa Ana City Council in April 1992. This No Project Alternative <br />would result in approximately 1.91 million more square feet of commercial uses (office, retail and <br />hotel) and 38 more residential units on the project site than under the City Place project. This No <br />Project Alternative would result in substantially greater land use densities on the project site than the <br />proposed project. The No ProjectlExisting Entitlement Alternative would meet all of the objectives <br />for the City Place project. <br /> <br />6,3 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE <br /> <br />The Design Alternative reduces the development on the project site by 123,434 square feet and <br />would result in a reduction of overall density and FARon the project site. The Design Alternative <br />would only marginally reduce impacts compared to the proposed project for hydrology and water <br />quality, noise, public services and utilities and service systems. The Design Alternative would have <br />no change on impacts compared to the proposed project on aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources <br />and hazardous materials, The Design Alternative would result in reduced traffic impacts in the <br />short and long term, but not enough to reduce the impact to below a level of significance. The <br />Design Alternative would meet all of the objectives for the City Place project. <br /> <br />6.4 COMP ARlSON OF IMPACTS <br /> <br />Table 9-1 in the EIR, provided on the following page, compares the unavoidable adverse impacts of <br />the City Place project and the No ProjectlExisting Conditions, No ProjectlExisting Entitlement and <br />Design Alternatives, <br /> <br />TABLE 9-1 <br />COMPARISON OF THE IMPACTS OF THE CITY PLACE PROJECT <br />AND THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES (1) <br /> <br />U: IDBottlwp51 ICity Place findings. doc <br />September 29, 2004 <br /> <br />Page 28 <br /> <br />75A-150 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.