RES 10340 - Laserfiche WebLink

The No Project Alternative Description An EIR is required to consider a "No Project" alternative. In the case of the Oak Grove Planned Unit Development, the no project scenario takes as its starting point the existing planning designation applicable to the site. As described in the DEIR, the 562-acre site carries two designations: On the 489-acres within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), the designation is Rural Density Residential (RDR), which allows no more than one dwelling unit per five gross acres, or 98 dwelling units. On the 73 acres outside the UGB, the designation is Public Health and Safety, which allows no development other than asingle-family dwelling unit on existing private lots of record. (There is no existing lot of record for this area.) The Oak Grove Planned Unit Development is consistent with the level of development the General Plan contemplates as the Original Project proposes exactly the maximum number of residential units that the General Plan allows. The No Project Alternative would be a project similarly consistent with the General Plan (i.e., a residential project of 98 units) but possibly configured in a different manner from the Original Project. A project of 98 units of a different design to the Original project has the theoretical potential of serving as the no project alternative. Such a project, however, could require an extensive road network that, together with water lines, sewer lines, and provisions for drainage, would be not only expensive to the applicant but also undesirable and burdensome to the City as well as involving environmental impacts that could not be mitigated. Finding: Infeasible Implementing the No Project Altemative would be inconsistent with the direction of the Pleasanton General Plan, which calls for preserving large blocks of open space land by encouraging the clustering of development (Program 4.4) and for using clustered development as one of a number of site planning and design techniques to minimize impacts to water quality, including minimizing land disturbance, minimizing impervious surfaces, preserving open space, and maintaining riparian areas with buffer zones to reduce runoff into waterways (Program 17.4). Further, with a project of 98 lots, in the potential absence of significant clustering, the environmental impacts of such an alternative could be less susceptible to mitigation. The No Project alternative is, therefore, found to be infeasible. The No Development Alternative Description The Oak Grove Planned Unit Development site in its current condition comprises the no development alternative. Exhibit A Page 9 of 45 Ordinance No. 1961 PUD-33, Oak Grove