Laserfiche WebLink
¢NYIAONMDNTAG-U(I'ACT RTVORT ADDINDUM w4MSTAONU RANCH A¢Yr 3T.O PRO ACT' <br />161"rCMDDC iD19' SANTA ANA', OAI,IrORN1A- <br />2.6 <br />GEOLOGY AND SOILS <br />No" <br />mue <br />is Sob l3ena <br />FF'Utf?fI,lFle lr/'eject; <br />5[6019030( <br />scwr0 <br />Ch4ner from <br />Impnd <br />Impact <br />1'1m, I..x ADaly,i, <br />(;I) <br />Expose people orstruOures to potential silbsraiitial adverse <br />CITeels, including the risk Of loss. inlury. or death involvine: <br />i) Rupture of a. knovm earthquake fault; as. delineated on the <br />must recent,Alquist-Priolo Earth(plake,Fault Zoning Map <br />L3 <br />11issued <br />by,.thu:State Geologist lour the -thea or based on other <br />substantial evidence of a known fault? <br />ii) Strong sei5micgniundsliakini;? <br />❑ <br />iii) Seismic -related Piound failure, incEding liquelaction? <br />❑ <br />iv) Unidslides? <br />❑ <br />Restilt in substantial soil erosion or die IZ of to soil?lj <br />e) <br />Would the - project result in the loss ora unit ucg culo ie featuie? <br />(d) <br />Is the'project Ic ated-onstrata ,or soil;that is=unstable tir that <br />would become unstable as result ofthe.project and potentially' <br />❑ <br />E]resultin <br />on- or otl-sitelandshcle; lateral spreading, subsidenee,' <br />liquefaction, or colla ie? <br />(t:) <br />Where sewers am not available for clic disposal of wastewater, is <br />dleloil capable ot'supporung the we of septic hiuki.or <br />11 <br />El <br />disposal systems?, <br />Analysis of Project Changes: <br />a) (i) As with all of Southern'California, the Project site is sulijeetto strong ground motion <br />resulting from earthquakes on nearby faults: According to the City of Santa Ana General <br />Plan, Seismic Safety Element(1952, reformatted 2010)i,no active, potentially, active, or <br />nactive fadlts are known to exist in Santa An'a. In addition, according to.the City of or <br />Aiia General Plan, Land Use Elernent (1998), there are no Alquist-Ptiolo Earthquake Fault <br />Zones within the City. Therefore, the Revised Prajectwould not expose people or structures <br />10 substantial adverse effecls'involving the rapture of a known earthquake fault as delineated <br />on the most recentAlquist-Ptiolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, and no mitigation is <br />required. -1'he Certified EIR also concluded that the Project site is not subject to fault rupture. <br />Therefore, the Revised Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those <br />identified in the Certified E1R. No new mitigation measures are required. <br />(ii) The Prolect,site, like all of Southern,California, is located in an active seismic region—Ground <br />shaking resulting from earthquakes' associated with both nearby and more distant faults is <br />likely,to occur. According to die City of Santa Ana General Plan, Seismic Safety Element <br />(1952, reformatted 2010), the City is'in close proximity to two major faults: the Newport - <br />Inglewood Fault Zone and the Whittier -Elsinore Fault Zone, The San Andreas and Raymond <br />Faults are also proximate to the City. Of these Aults, the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone is <br />considered most likely -source fnrAiture earthquakes. Because of the proximity of these <br />faults, there is a potential for seismic shaking generated from active faults to occur during the <br />life of the project. y <br />The Revised Project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measures G1O-1,'GEO-2, <br />and GEO-=F from the Certified FIR. Mitigation Measure GEO-I requires preparation of a final <br />I' S11016,04 -A lik:mJ49(05117D 2-29 <br />75B-78 <br />