2380 - Laserfiche WebLink

e.2 Fact. Under the Reduced Intensity of Develop- ment Alternative, neither the Amendment nor the Project would be approved. City would adopt amendments to the Land Use and GME Elements whereby allowable intensity of development in the North Pleasanton area would be reduced. Goal 2 of the Growth Management Element states that development should occur in an efficient, logical and orderly fashion. Given projected demand, reduced intensity of development would result in development being scattered throughout the region. This can result in adverse impacts as it would preclude efficient use of completed infrastructure and reduce the likelihood of efficient use of transit mitigations. Projects must be economically capable of supporting assessments for requisite capital improvements and community services. A reduced intensity of use would result in a reduction of tax base and a reduction of City's ability to assess those proper.t,ies for needed capital improvements. Liens resulting from assessments to finance the infrastructure mandate development of commercial and industrial uses at proposed densities. F. No Approval of Project Alternative. f.l Finding. The No Approval of Project Alternative is infeasible. f.2 Fact. As explained in the EIR, adoption of the No Approval of Project Alternative would result in either (i) the development of the Property pursuant to its present zoning and parcel map or (ii) no further development of the Property. Development of the Property pursuant to its present zoning and parcel map would have an equivalent impact. The streets and infrastruc- ture to support the Project are already substan- tially completed and channels have been im- proved. The Property lies at the intersection of I -580 and 1-680, an area appropriate for ur- ban infill. Twenty percent (20 of the Project has already been approved or built. The No Approval of Project Alternative is economically infeasible because of the problems created by an inadequate fiscal base to support projected demand for capital improvements and community services for the community as a whole even with- out development of the Project. Liens resulting from assessments to finance the infrastructure 22.