2025-041 - Certifing Final Supplemental Enviromental Impact for The Village

Home Browse Search

Table 9-1: Summary Comparison of the Impacts of the Alternatives provides, in summary format, a comparison between the level of impacts for each alternative and the Project. In addition, Table 9-2: Summary Comparison of the Alternatives' Ability to Meet Project Objectives provides a comparison of the ability of each of the alternatives to meet the objectives of the Project. 9.2.1 Alternative 'I: No ProjectlNo Build Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e), the EIR is required to evaluate and analyze the impacts of a No Project Alternative. When the project is the revision of an existing land use or regulatory plan, policy, or ongoing operation, the No Project Alternative includes what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. Further, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) states, "In certain instances, the no project alternative means `no build' wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained." In addition,the No Project/No Build Alternative includes what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. Therefore, under this alternative, no new development would occur on the project site, and the site would remain in its existing condition as the South Coast Plaza Village with seven existing buildings, totaling approximately 164,049 square feet of existing commercial retail uses, with surface parking and landscaping. In this alternative scenario, the seven buildings are assumed to be fully operational as a shopping plaza with multiple retail uses, a restaurant, and a movie theater. (Draft Supplemental EIR, p. 6-7.) Environmental Effects: The No Project/No Build Alternative would result in the continued operation of the existing South Coast Plaza Village, containing seven commercial buildings, surface parking, and landscaping. Development and operation of the proposed mixed-use development would not occur. As a result, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to construction and operation compared to the Project and would not require the mitigation measures related to air quality, cultural resources,geology and soils, noise, and tribal cultural resources. However, the benefits of the Project would also not occur, including implementation of the GPU South Bristol Street Focus Area objectives; improvements to roadway, pedestrian, bicycle infrastructure; low impact development (LID) -compliant infrastructure improvements; provision of housing within a Transit Priority Area (TPA); and improvements to the jobs/housing balance. Further, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not build out the GPU's DC-5 designation as a major development activity area and anchor to the City's commercial corridors and would not implement the GPU South Bristol Street Focus Area vision and objectives, or the SCAG policies promoting high-density, infill development. This alternative also would not assist in the improvement of the job/housing balance or reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Therefore, this alternative would not be consistent with the GPU and would not implement the City's land use plan to the same extent as the Project. Impacts under the No Project/No Build Alternative related to land use would be greater than the less-than-significant impacts of the Project. Generally, the impacts of the No Project/No Build Alternative would be less in severity than those of the Project and would not require implementation of mitigation measures, with the exception of land use and planning; however, this alternative would not implement the benefits resulting from the Project. (Draft Supplemental EIR, pp. 6-8—6-13.) Resolution No. 2025-041 Page 100 of 140