14 - Laserfiche WebLink

2. City Objective 2: Maximize the benefits of the location of the area of the proposed Zone as an infill site located along transportation corridors and near transit by encouraging the development of both locally and regionally accessible uses in the area of the proposed Zone. The No Project Alternative does not include adoption of the proposed Zone; as discussed above, without adoption of the Zone, development within the area would likely proceed in an incremental fashion, and result in a low likelihood that multiple tenant commitments to the area would be made. Without the adoption of the Zone, therefore, the mix and amount of uses that would likely be developed under the No Project Alternative would not serve to maximize the unique benefits of the location of the area as stated in City Objective 2, and this objective would not be met. 3. City Objective 3: Encourage the development of a diverse mix of uses in the City that would promote long-term economic growth by generating substantial new revenues for the City. The City has conducted multiple economic and fiscal analyses which indicate that, with adoption of the Zone, the mix of uses anticipated to be developed within the area of the Zone would yield a substantial level of fiscal and economic benefits, including up to $2.3 million in new City General Fund revenues annually (on full buildout) and up to approximately $383,975 annually in property taxes, as well as approximately $277,440 in annual revenue to the Pleasanton Unified School District (see also the fiscal and economic analysis prepared for the Final SEIR [Appendix A] as well as the Supplemental Comparative Analysis). The No Project Alternative does not include the adoption of the Zone and development within the area under this alternative would, as discussed above, occur in an incremental fashion; as a result, the No Project Alternative would not encourage the development of a diverse mix of uses that would promote long-term economic growth in the area of the Zone, and would not generate a substantial level of new revenues. Therefore, this alternative would not meet City Objective 3. Alternative 2: Reduced Retail Alternative 2, Reduced Retail, would include some of the same uses as the proposed Zone, including general retail and a hotel use, but would not include club retail uses. Under this alternative, the Zone would be adopted, and Parcels 6, 9, and 10 would be developed in an initial phase that would take place within the same buildout period for these parcels as described for the proposed Zone. Existing uses on other parcels within the area of the proposed Zone would continue to operate. Under this alternative, the area of the proposed Zone would be developed with approximately 259,500 square feet of new building area, including 171,500 square feet of general retail uses and 88,000 square feet of hotel uses. Under this alternative, it is assumed that development of the hotel uses would take place first and development of general retail uses would take place over a longer timeframe. The Reduced Retail Alternative would avoid significant air quality impacts of the proposed Zone: under this alternative, annual operational air emissions of PM10 would be less 55