11 ATTACHMENT 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

2030). The table below provides an estimate of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for that period: Table 2: Estimate of RHNA to Year 2030 and Acreage Needed to Accommodate Housing Needs 2014-2022 Estimated Additional Estimate of Estimate of Additional RHNA 2014 units to be 2022-2030 units to be Acreage Inventory planned for RHNA planned for Needed 2014-2022 2014-2030 RHNA Very Low Income 1,102 991 111 1,102 1,213 40 Low Income Moderate 405 0 405 405 810 35 Income Above Moderate 551 270 281 551 832 111 Income Total 2,058 1,261 797 2,058 2,855 186 The Preferred Plan (Alternative 5C) would accommodate approximately 62 percent of the total estimated housing need, and about 51 percent of the multifamily housing need over that period. III. ANALYSIS The impact analyses listed above were prepared on plans with slightly different development programs than are currently shown in Exhibit A. The tables in Exhibit H provide a comparison between the development assumptions used for the various alternatives analyzed in the impact reports and the current Preferred Plan and Alternatives. Options 1 and 2 are the same as those analyzed in the impact reports. Options 5A, 5B and 5C are similar to Option 7 which was analyzed for financial feasibility but was not analyzed in the traffic report. Former Option 6 and current Option 6 are similar but the current Option 6 has slightly more units and slightly fewer single-family units. Given these relatively minor differences, the impact reports (Exhibits C through G) are still useful to evaluate the impacts of the options. Traffic Impact Analysis: The analysis prepared by Fehr & Peers provides information regarding the four land use and street network options. The comparison includes daily external vehicles trips, AM and PM peak hour external trips, internal trips, trips by transit and expected levels of walking and biking trips. In addition, roadway segment volumes for El Charro Road and Busch Road are calculated for the four alternatives. A table summarizing these findings is on page 4 of the report. As would be expected, Option 6 with the most residential units and similar amount of retail, office and industrial development to the other options generates the most trips. The impact of the proposed options is also compared to the analysis prepared for the Housing Element Supplemental EIR. Because the amount of development assumed for the SEIR was greater than any of the options currently being studied for the area, the number of daily trips P13-1858, East Pleasanton Specific Plan September 25, 2013 Page 4 of 6