Full Text
Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-1 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.1.1 Purpose and Scope The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR ) include a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that would “feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). This chapter identifies potential alternatives to the Proposed Project and evaluates them, as required by CEQA. Key provisions of the CEQA Guidelines on alternatives (Section 15126.6[a] through are summarized below to explain the foundation and legal requirements for the alternatives analysis in the EIR. “The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly” (15126.6[b]). “The specific alternative of ‘no project’ shall also be evaluated along with its impact” (15126.6[e][1]). “The no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published, and at the time the environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would reasonably be 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. If the environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives” (15126.6[e][2]). “The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a ‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project” (15126.6[f]). “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent)” (15126.6[f][1]). For alternative locations, “only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR” (15126.6[f][2][A]). ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-2 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 “An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative” (15126.6[f][3]). For each development alternative, this analysis: Describes the alterative, Analyzes the impact of the alternative as compared to the Proposed Project, Identifies the impacts of the project that would be avoided or lessened by the alternative, Assesses whether the alternative would meet most of the basic project objectives, and Evaluates the comparative merits of the alternative and the project. Per the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d), additional significant effects of the alternatives are discussed in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed. 7.1.2 Project Objectives As described in Section 3.2, the following objectives have been established for the Proposed Project and will aid decision makers in their review of the project, the project alternatives, and associated environmental impacts: 1. Implement the City’s applicable General Plan Goals and Policies including, but not limited to, establishment of the Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades. 2. Implement the Planning Principles of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP). 3. Provide additional entertainment opportunities within a mixed-use environment in close proximity to arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades consistent with regional planning goals and policies. 4. Approve a zone reclassification for a portion of the project site from the Transition Zone/Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to the Public Recreational (PR) Zone/PTMU Overlay Zone, so that the zoning is consistent throughout the Project Site. 5. Increase the number of events at Honda Center including, but not limited to, a possible NBA team. 6. Implement various improvements to Honda Center to accommodate and enhance current and future additional event activity. 7. Expand the entertainment sporting options at the Honda Center to continue to position the City as a world class entertainment destination ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-3 7.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS The following is a discussion of the land use alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in this EIR. 7.2.1 Alternative Sites CEQA requires that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project. The key question and first step in the analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (Guidelines Sec. 15126.6[f][2][A]). In general, any development of the size and type proposed by the project would have substantially the same impacts on air quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Without a site specific analysis, impacts on aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, and mineral resources cannot be evaluated. Where a previous document has sufficiently analyzed a range of reasonable alternative locations and environmental impacts for projects with the same basic purpose, the lead agency should review the previous document. The EIR may rely on the previous document to help it assess the feasibility of potential project alternatives to the extent the circumstances remain substantially the same as they relate to the alternative (Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][C]). As the California Supreme Court indicated in its decisions in Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors, 52 Cal. 3d 553 (1990): The general plan has been aptly described as the “constitution for all future developments” within the city or county... “The propriety of virtually any local decision affecting land use and development depends upon consistency with the applicable general plan and its elements..”.. To be sure, the general plan is not immutable, far from it. But it may not be trifled with as the limitation on the number of amendments to the general plan in any calendar year attests.” (Goleta, 52 cal.3d at 570-571) [In] some circumstances, an EIR may consider alternatives requiring a site-specific amendment of the general plan. However, an EIR is not ordinarily an occasion for the reconsideration or overhaul of fundamental land use policy. (Goleta, at 573) The Proposed Project would involve additional events at Honda Center and construct minor enhancements to the facility. This alternative site analysis considers both existing facilities and undeveloped sites large enough to construct an arena with a minimum capacity of 18,900 spectators and associated parking. The minimum site size for construction of a new facility is approximately 40 acres. It should be noted that Honda Center already has adequate capacity for an additional permanent tenant, including but not limited to, an NBA team or Arena Football. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-4 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Use of an Alternate Existing Facility There are no other indoor sports facilities in the City of Anaheim, or in all of Orange County, that provide a minimum capacity of 18,900 spectators. There is an arena at the Anaheim Convention Center with a capacity of 7,500 spectators; however, this capacity is too small to host an additional professional sports franchise. The nearest other facilities with sufficient capacity are in Los Angeles County: Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena in Exposition Park south of downtown Los Angeles, and the Forum in the City of Inglewood. Staples Center already hosts two NBA teams, the Los Angeles Lakers and the Los Angeles Clippers and an NHL team, the Los Angeles Kings. Each NBA team and the NHL team play 41 home games per season. The NBA and NHL season lasts six months, November through April. Considering the schedule demands of the existing NBA and NHL teams, it is very unlikely that Staples Center would be able to host a fourth permanent tenant. The Forum and the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena each formerly hosted one NBA team: the Lakers at the Forum, and the Clippers at the Sports Arena. Due to the age of these facilities, they are not considered suitable for an additional professional sports franchise. Development of a New Facility at an Alternate Site The Honda Center site is located on approximately 41 acres. Developing a facility with comparable capacity and amenities elsewhere in Orange County would require assembling a site of similar area. Northern and central urban Orange County is nearly completely built out; thus, assembling a site of that size would require demolition of substantial numbers of homes and/or businesses. Two potential alternative sites include the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station now known as Tustin Legacy and the Orange County Great Park (formerly Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro). However, both sites have adopted land use plans which do not currently include sites for a 41 acre sports and entertainment facility. Development of a new facility on an alternate site would also result in numerous impacts that would not occur with the Proposed Project. Since the Honda Center is already constructed, development on an alternative site would commit non-renewable resources such as petroleum, wood, concrete and steel, which would not be required for the Proposed Project. In addition, development of an alternative site would result in construction impacts including noise, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and traffic. Operational impacts including air quality, noise, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation and traffic, would likely be similar but would occur in a different location and would lack the existing transportation infrastructure located near Honda Center including freeway access and access to transit. Therefore, development of an alternative site would result in greater impacts than those associated with the proposed project and have been rejected from further analysis. 7.3 ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS Based on the criteria listed above, the following three alternatives have been determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives which have the potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but which may avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. These alternatives are analyzed in detail below: No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Alternative Additional Traffic Improvements Alternative ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-5 Table 7-1 provides a summary of the relative impacts and feasibility of each alternative. A complete discussion of each alternative is provided below. An EIR must identify an “environmentally superior” alternative and where the No Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is then required to identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated. Each alternative’s environmental impacts are compared to the Proposed Project and determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior. However, only those impacts found significant and unavoidable are used in making the final determination of whether an alternative is environmentally superior or inferior to the Proposed Project. Impacts involving air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and traffic, were found to be significant and unavoidable. Section 7.7 identifies the Environmentally Superior Alternative. The Preferred Land Use Alternative (Proposed Project) is analyzed in detail in Chapter 5 of this SEIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-6 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 Table 7-1 Summary of Development Alternatives Alternative Description Basis for Selection and Summary of Analysis PROPOSED PROJECT Add an additional permanent tenant and associated events at Honda Center Construct the following additions/expansions to Honda Center: o 15,364 square feet of restaurant space o 5,846 square foot team store o 12,436 square foot exterior grand terrace o Expand loading dock Renovate: o Interior locker room o Interior office space o Interior balcony suite Interior electrical upgrades PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1) No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative Existing general plan and zoning designations would remain 650,000 square foot Honda Center on 41- acre site No changes to current use of Honda Center Hosts Anaheim Ducks and a variety of entertainment events Required by CEQA Avoids need for zoning reclassification Avoids construction impacts Avoids significant transportation and traffic impacts Does not meet the project objectives. 2) No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Alternative Add new permanent tenant to Honda Center and/or an additional 69 events for a total of 222 events per year above the current average of 153 events per year. Would not include any of the proposed expansions, renovations, and upgrades described as part of the Proposed Project Eliminates potential construction impacts Does not avoid significant transportation and traffic impacts Meets most of the project objectives (inconsistent with Objective 6) but not to the degree of the Proposed Project 3) Additional Traffic Improvements Alternative Add new permanent tenant to Honda Center and/or additional 69 events for a total of 222 events per year above the current average of 153 events per year. Develop all expansions, renovations, and upgrades included in the Proposed Project Add roadway improvements to improve operation of intersections and roadway segments that would operate at unacceptable LOS in the Proposed Project plus Angel Stadium Event condition to acceptable LOS. Reduces traffic impacts to less than significant Does not avoid significant environmental impacts other than traffic impacts Meets most of the project objectives (inconsistent with Objectives 1 and 2) Traffic mitigations would require exercise of condemnation and removal of buildings and would be inconsistent with PTMLUP planning efforts. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-7 7.4 NO PROJECT/EXISTING LAND USE ALTERNATIVE This alternative, which is required by CEQA, assumes that the structure and operation of the Honda Center would remain unchanged. No additional tenants or events would occur at the facility, and none of the proposed facility improvements would be undertaken. Use of the Honda Center would continue to average about 153 events per year, including Anaheim Ducks NHL events. 7.4.1 Air Quality No construction or additional operational emissions would occur. Use of Honda Center would continue to operate similar to existing operations with a variety of sports and entertainment events, including 41 home games for the Anaheim Ducks. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. 7.4.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions No construction or operational GHG emissions would occur. No construction or additional operational emissions would occur. Use of Honda Center would continue to operate similar to existing operations with a variety of sports and entertainment events, including 41 home games for the Anaheim Ducks. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project; 7.4.3 Land Use and Planning This alternative would not involve any changes to land use regulations pertaining to the Honda Center site. Impacts to land use and planning would be reduced compared to those of the Proposed Project. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project, although this is not a significant, unavoidable impact of the Proposed Project. 7.4.4 Noise No construction noise or additional operational noise impacts would occur in this alternative; thus, this alternative is considered environmentally superior to the Proposed Project, although this is not a significant, unavoidable impact of the Proposed Project. 7.4.5 Transportation and Traffic This alternative would not generate construction trips or additional event trips and thus would have no additional impacts to intersection or arterial segment levels of service. Therefore, this alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. 7.4.6 Utilities and Service Systems This alternative would not change water demand and wastewater generation at the Honda Center. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project, although this is not a significant, unavoidable impact of the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-8 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 7.4.7 Conclusion Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project in all six resource areas, including air quality, GHG, land use and planning, noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities. All impacts of the Proposed Project would be less than significant, with the exception transportation and traffic. Attainment of Project Objectives This alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the Proposed Project identified in Section 3.2 of this DEIR. Comparative Merits This alternative would reduce impacts compared to the Proposed Project in all six categories analyzed in the EIR: air quality, GHG, land use and planning, noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities. However, the Proposed Project would not have any significant and unavoidable impacts, with the exception of transportation and traffic. This alternative would avoid the significant traffic impacts of the Project, however, this alternative would not meet any of the project objectives. 7.5 NO ENHANCEMENTS WITH NEW HONDA CENTER EVENTS ALTERNATIVE This alternative would allow up to 222 events per year at Honda Center but would not construct any of the renovations and upgrades included in the Proposed Project. As a result, this Alternative would not include the proposed team store, restaurant space, or outdoor grand terrace. The seating capacity of Honda Center in this alternative would be the same as for the Proposed Project, 18,900. The slight increase in employees working at the restaurant and expanded store in the Proposed Project would not occur in this alternative. Employment density in square feet per employee is estimated as one employee per 617 square feet for both retail (except regional retail) and service (including restaurant) uses (Natelson Company 2001). Thus, the reduction in operational employment in this alternative would be (15,364/617), or 25 employees, for the restaurant and (4,046/617), or seven employees, for the expanded store, for a total of 32 employees. Thirty-two employees would be about 0.16 percent of the total New Honda Center Event population. The numbers of spectators and team members would be the same in this alternative as in the Proposed Project. 7.5.1 Air Quality No construction would occur, and no construction emissions would result, from implementation of this alternative. Operational emissions would be reduced in this alternative due to a slight reduction in the number of employees; however, the vast majority of operational emissions of the proposed project would be from existing facilities at Honda Center and from vehicle trips to and from Honda Center. Emissions of air pollutants would be reduced in this alternative; however, air quality impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. Therefore, this alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-9 7.5.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions In this alternative operational GHG emissions from the number of event attendees at Honda Center and traveling to and from Honda Center would be the same as in the Proposed Project. Operational emissions would be reduced in this alternative because fewer employees would be generated by the restaurant and team store, which would not be developed in this alternative. Construction GHG emissions also would not occur in this alternative. Therefore, impacts would be reduced comparable to the Proposed Project. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. 7.5.3 Land Use and Planning This alternative would also involve the zoning reclassification included in the Proposed Project; therefore, this alternative would be similar to the Proposed Project with regards to land use. 7.5.4 Noise This alternative would avoid construction noise impacts, as no construction would occur. Operational traffic noise impacts of this alternative would be similar to those of the Proposed Project. Most of the proposed additions and expansions at Honda Center in the proposed project would be indoors, and thus would not generate noise affecting people outside of the Honda Center site. The only substantial outdoor addition to Honda Center in the Proposed Project would be the grand terrace; use of the grand terrace is not expected to generate substantial noise levels that would affect people beyond the Honda Center site. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project regarding construction noise impacts; however, noise impacts of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. 7.5.5 Transportation and Traffic This alternative would avoid construction traffic impacts, as no construction would occur. During operation of this alternative the number of employees would be reduced compared to the Proposed Project; however, numbers of spectators and team members are expected to be similar in the two scenarios. The difference in the event populations between the two scenarios would be trivial; thus, operational traffic impacts would be similar for this alternative as for the Proposed Project. As a result, the significant traffic impacts of the Project would not be avoided under this alternative. 7.5.6 Utilities and Service Systems As discussed in Section 5.6, Utilities and Service Systems, operational water use and wastewater generation increase if the Proposed Project were implemented due to the new restaurant space and team store. Therefore, this alternative would reduce wastewater generation by approximately 3,181.5 gallons per day (gpd) or 3.6 acre feet per year (AFY) and water consumption by 4,136 gpd or 4.6 AFY. However, utilities and service systems impacts were not identified as significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-10 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 7.5.7 Conclusion Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project in four of the six resource areas analyzed in Chapter 5: air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and utilities and service systems. However, note that for each of these resources this alternative would reduce construction impacts but not operational impacts associated with air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, or traffic. In addition, the significant air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and traffic impacts of the Project would not be avoided under this alternative. This alternative is neither environmentally superior nor inferior to the Proposed Project in land use and planning. Attainment of Project Objectives This alternative would meet most but not all of the project objectives as described in Section 3.2. Comparative Merits This alternative would reduce impacts compared to the Proposed Project in the categories of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation and traffic as it relates to construction; and would have similar impacts in the category of land use and planning. This alternative would satisfy most but not all of the project objectives. However, this alternative would not eliminate the significant air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation/traffic impacts associated with the Proposed Project. 7.6 ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ALTERNATIVE To assess the traffic impacts associated the Proposed Project, a total of five scenarios under three horizon years are analyzed by this Draft Environmental Impact Report, as outlined below: 2011 Baseline Analytical Project Direct Impacts Scenario: 1) 2011 Baseline (No Events) 2) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event1 3) 2011 Baseline with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event2 4) 2011 Baseline with Project3 5) 2011 Baseline with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2013 Opening Year Analytical Impacts Scenario and Near-Term Impacts Scenario: 1) 2013 Opening Year (No Events) 2) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 1 Average Attendance Honda Center Event is assumed to be an average attendance event or 11,264 seats as described in the September 2, 2011 Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 344 for Honda Center Enhancement Project. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. 2 Angel Stadium Event is assumed to be an average Angel Stadium baseball game attendance of 29,402 based on year 2010 season attendance figures provided by the City of Anaheim. Traffic conditions are adjusted accordingly from traffic counts taken for the August 24, 2011 event. 3 Project is assumed to be an 18,900 seat sold out capacity condition. Traffic forecasts are adjusted accordingly from April 6, 2011 event traffic counts. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-11 3) 2013 Opening Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2013 Opening Year with Project 5) 2013 Opening Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 2030 Future Year Long-Term Impacts Scenario (General Plan Buildout): 1) 2030 Future Year (No Events) 2) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event 3) 2030 Future Year with Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event 4) 2030 Future Year with Project 5) 2030 Future Year with Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event Upon completion of the traffic conditions assessment for each scenario above, Project impacts and mitigation were identified through an evaluation of the following three comparisons of with and without Project conditions: 1) No Events vs. Project 2) Average Attendance Honda Center Event vs. Project 3) Average Attendance Honda Center Event and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event vs. Project and Concurrent Angel Stadium Event The Additional Traffic Improvements Alternative would allow the same number events as the Proposed Project (up to 222 events), develop all of the enhancements to the facility planned in the Proposed Project and include the proposed zone reclassification. This alternative would also involve roadway improvements to reduce significant traffic impacts in the 2011 Baseline, 2013 Opening Year, and 2030 Future Year Conditions for Comparisons 1, 2, and 3, to less than significant levels. Intersections, arterial segments, and freeways that would be significantly impacted by the proposed project, for Comparisons 1, 2, and 3 are shown in Tables 5.5- 44 through 5.5-46. The purpose of this alternative is to eliminate the significant transportation and traffic impacts of the Proposed Project. All proposed improvements to public roadways would be constructed by the City of Anaheim or its contractor. Honda Center would be responsible for the full cost of construction of improvements needed for mitigating significant impacts in the 2011 Baseline and 2013 Opening Year with Project scenarios. Honda Center would be responsible for fair-share payments toward the cost of construction of improvements needed for mitigating significant impacts in the 2030 Proposed Project plus Concurrent Angel Stadium Event scenario. The necessary improvements would result in additional right-of-way and impact existing structures, parking, and landscaping. Under this Alternative, improvements would be required at 47 locations, including 11 intersections, 26 arterial roadway segments, 5 freeway ramps, and 5 freeway weaving segments. For a list of improvement locations, see Tables 5.5-44 through 5.5-46. This alternative would be environmentally inferior in four resource areas; air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and planning, and noise, mainly due to construction of the additional roadway improvements. The necessary improvements would result in additional right-of-way and impact pedestrian connections, existing and proposed bike lanes, existing structures, parking, and landscaping. However, the significant transportation and traffic impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be avoided. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-12 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 This Alternative would also be in conflict with many of the City’s goals and policies included in the General Plan and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Compass Blueprint which promote the use of alternative forms of transportation including walking, biking, busses, and trains. As stated above, the improvements necessary to fully mitigate the traffic impacts of the Proposed Project plus Angel Stadium Event scenario would result in additional right-of-way and impact pedestrian connections, existing and proposed bike lanes, existing structures, parking, and landscaping. This alternative would meet most of the project objectives established for the Proposed Project. However, the proposed roadway improvements would impact adjacent land uses and result in greater impacts than those associated with the Proposed Project. This alternative would reduce impacts that occur when an event at Honda Center and an event at Angels Stadium happen concurrently. However, this condition only occurs a few times per year. Freeway Ramps, Freeway Weaving Segment 7.6.2 Air Quality Additional short-term construction impacts would occur in this alternative due to the road construction associated with this alternative. Road construction associated with this alternative would occur at the locations listed above resulting in additional construction emissions adjacent to those locations. Many of the locations are surrounded by sensitive receptors to criteria air pollutants such as PM10, PM2.5, and CO. Construction of roadway improvements would comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations for reducing air emissions pursuant to a SCAQMD Permit to Construct (Rule 201) and Fugitive Dust rule, Rule 403. Operational emissions from vehicles would be reduced in this alternative due to reduced congestion resulting from roadway improvements that would be built in this alternative. Idling vehicles produce more emissions of air pollutants than do moving vehicles. However, regional emissions would remain the same because the trip generation would be the same as with the Proposed Project. Therefore, this alternative would result in greater construction air quality impacts while operational impacts would remain the same. 7.6.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Construction emissions would be increased due to construction of road improvements. However, regional GHG emissions would remain the same because the trip generation would be the same as with the Proposed Project. Therefore, this alternative would result in greater construction GHG impacts while operational impacts would remain the same. 7.6.4 Land Use and Planning This alternative would involve the same zone change as the Proposed Project. As with the Proposed Project, the zoning reclassification would be required. However, this alternative would require additional traffic improvements and right-of-way requirements, resulting in impacts to existing structures, parking, and landscaping. Therefore, land use impacts would be greater than the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-13 7.6.5 Noise Operational noise impacts would be similar for this alternative as for the Proposed Project, as operational characteristics of the Honda Center would be the same in both scenarios. Short-term construction noise would be greater for this alternative due to construction of roadway improvements. Of the forty-seven locations where roadway improvements would be built (26 intersections, 11 roadway segments, 5 freeway ramps, and 5 freeway weaving segments), sensitive receptors, including residential uses, are located adjacent to many of them. Therefore, this alternative would involve greater short-term noise impacts. 7.6.6 Transportation and Traffic The proposed roadway improvements in this alternative would reduce all of the significant impacts in the 2013 Proposed Project plus Angel Stadium Event and 2030 Proposed Project plus Angel Stadium Event scenarios to less than significant. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project because it would eliminate the significant transportation and traffic impacts of the Proposed Project. 7.6.7 Utilities and Service Systems Utility demands by operation of Honda Center in this alternative would be the same as for the Proposed Project, since the number of events would be the same. 7.6.8 Conclusion Avoid or Substantially Lessen Project Impacts This alternative would be environmentally inferior in four resource areas; air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and planning, and noise, mainly due to construction of the additional roadway improvements. The necessary improvements would result in additional right-of-way and impact existing structures, parking, and landscaping. However, the significant transportation and traffic impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be avoided. Attainment of Project Objectives This alternative would meet most of the project objectives as described in Section 3.2, except for the first and second objectives. Comparative Merits This alternative would be environmentally inferior in four resource areas; air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and planning, and noise, mainly due to construction of the additional roadway improvements. The necessary improvements would result in additional right-of-way and impact pedestrian connections, existing and proposed bike lanes, existing structures, parking, and landscaping. However, the significant transportation and traffic impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be avoided. This Alternative would also be in conflict with many of the City’s goals and policies included in the General Plan and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Compass Blueprint which promote the use of alternative forms of transportation including walking, biking, ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Page 7-14 The Planning CenterIDC&E January 2012 busses, and trains. As stated above, the improvements necessary to fully mitigate the traffic impacts of the Proposed Project plus Angel Stadium Event scenario would result in additional right-of-way and impact pedestrian connections, existing and proposed bike lanes, existing structures, parking, and landscaping. This alternative would meet most of the project objectives established for the Proposed Project. However, the proposed roadway improvements would impact adjacent land uses and result in greater impacts than those associated with the Proposed Project. This alternative would reduce impacts that occur when an event at Honda Center and an event at Angels Stadium happen concurrently. However, this condition only occurs a few times per year. 7.7 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires a lead agency to identify the “environmentally superior alternative” and, in cases where the “No-Project” Alternative is environmentally superior to the Proposed Project, the environmentally superior development alternative must be identified. Two alternatives have been identified as “environmentally superior” to the Proposed Project: 1. No-Project/Existing Land Use Alternative 2. No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Alternative The No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative has the least impact to the environment because it is environmentally superior alternative with regard to air quality, GHG emissions, land use and planning, noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. However, CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[e][2]) states that if the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior development alternative. Table 7-2 shows impact comparison matrix for each impact category. Table 7-2 Alternative Impact Comparison Matrix Superior Same Inferior Air Quality* Greenhouse Gas Emissions* Land Use & Planning Noise Transportation and Traffic* No Project/Existing Land Use Utilities & Service Systems Construction Air Quality Operational Air Quality* Construction Noise Land Use and Planning Greenhouse Gas Emissions* Operational Noise Utilities and Service Systems Transportation and Traffic* No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Transportation and Traffic* Operational Air Quality* Construction Air Quality Operational Noise Greenhouse Gas Emissions* Utilities and Service Systems Land Use and Planning Additional Traffic Improvements Alternative Construction Noise Note: *Significant unavoidable project impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7. Alternatives to the Proposed Project Honda Center Enhancement Project Draft EIR City of Anaheim Page 7-15 The No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Alternative would reduce environmental impacts compared to the Proposed Project in two of the six resource areas: construction air quality and construction noise. However, the No Enhancements with New Honda Center Events Alternative would not avoid the significant impacts related to operational air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation and traffic. While meeting some of the project objectives, it would not implement various improvements to Honda Center to accommodate and enhance current and future additional event activity. The proposed project includes addition of amenities to Honda Center such as additional restaurant space, a new team store, and renovation of several areas in the facility. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts” [Guidelines Sec. 15126.6(c)]. These are factors which will be considered by the City of Anaheim decision-makers in determining whether to approve the Proposed Project or one of the alternatives identified above.