ORD 1579 - Laserfiche WebLink

OPTIONAL SITE ALTERNATIVE. With this alternative, uses protx~sed for the project would be relocated to the San Francisco Water Property in south Pleasanton. The property is nearly level, and is currently used for agriculture. Impacts generally would be similar to the proposed project, except ~hat grading and vegetation impacts would be reduced. The FEIR states that hydrologic impacts could be much greater for the optional site alternative in comparison with the proposed project. FI~-IR pages 11-5 through 11-7. Fir~ding: infeasible. The optional site alternative is found to be infeasible for the following reasons: (l)Environmental concerns on alternate site. The Final FAR (pages 11-7 and 11- 8) states that some impacts might increase for this alteralive, while other impacts would be reduced. (2) I,tl~. The applicants do not control the land in question. Section 3: Insignificant Impacts The City Council finds that all other impacts of the proposed project are insignificant, as documented in the FE-IR and supported by evidence elsewhere in the record. No mitigation is required for these insignificant impacts. Section 4: Statement of Overriding Considerations Section 4.0 General Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Pleasanton makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations: The City Council has balancaxt the benefits of the Kottinger Hills project to the City of Pleasanton against the adverse impacts identified in the EIR as significant and potentially significant which have not been eliminated or mitigated to a level of insignificance. The City Council, acting pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Soction 15093, hereby determines that the benefits of the project outweighs the unmitigated adverse impacts and the project should be approved. The City Coun,zil has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to adopt the project and to allow development of the project site. Although the City Council believes that the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures in the Final E/R, it recognizes that the implementation of the project earties with it irreversible environmental effects. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use and other considerations which support approval of the project. The City Council further finds that any one of the overriding considerations identified hereinafter in Section 4.2 is sufficient basis to approve the project as mitigated. 21