Laserfiche WebLink
and Fiscal Impact Analysis, for this comparison, and note that further fiscal <br />analyses have refined the results of this study). This analysis indicated that a <br />scenario identical to the Partial Buildout Alternative would yield only about <br />74 percent of the total annual general fund revenues that is currently <br />estimated would be generated under the proposed Zone, as well as only 69 <br />percent of the annual revenue that would be provided under the proposed <br />Zone to the.Pleasanton Unified School District. (The City's most recent <br />economic and fiscal analyses indicate that the mix of uses proposed within <br />the Zone would yield a substantial level of fiscal and economic benefits, <br />including up to $2.3 million in new City General Fund revenues annually <br />[on full buildout], as well as approximately $277,440 in annual revenue to <br />the Pleasanton Unified School District). This general comparison indicates <br />that, because it includes a lower volume of uses, the Partial Buildout <br />Alternative would be less likely to promote long-term economic growth to <br />the same extent as the Zone, and would not generate substantial new <br />revenues in comparison to the Zone, making the full achievement of City <br />Objective 3 less likely. <br />Environmentally Superior Alternative <br />CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(2) indicates that an EIR must identify the <br />Environmentally Superior Alternative from the range of alternatives evaluated in the EIR. If the <br />No Project Alternative is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative, then the EIR shall <br />also identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives. The <br />Environmentally Superior Alternative is the alternative that would result in the fewest and/or least <br />severe (lowest level) environmental impacts. <br />Alternative 2, Reduced Retail, would be the environmentally superior alternative <br />because it represents lower levels of PM10 and NOx emissions than the Partial Buildout Alternative <br />(a difference of approximately 3.5 and 3.9 tons per year, respectively) and a lower number of traffic <br />trips that would be generated (a difference of approximately 1,970 weekday daily trips). This <br />alternative would not directly result in the significant and unavoidable air quality impacts that <br />would occur under implementation of the proposed Zone. Other significant and unavoidable traffic <br />and transportation impacts that would occur with implementation of the proposed Zone would <br />remain under this alternative. The Reduced Retail Alternative meets most of the basic objectives of <br />the proposed Zone, namely, it would result in the adoption of a consistent framework for the City's <br />review and approval of new uses in the area of the proposed Zone, and would promote the <br />development of locally and regionally accessible uses. <br />M. Growth -Inducing Effects <br />A project may be growth -inducing if it directly or indirectly fosters economic or <br />population growth or additional housing, removes obstacles to growth, taxes community service <br />facilities, or encourages or facilitates other activities that cause significant environmental effects. <br />(CEQA Guidelines §15126[g].) <br />Under CEQA, induced growth is not considered necessarily detrimental or <br />beneficial. Induced growth is considered a significant impact only if it directly or indirectly affects <br />the ability of agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be demonstrated that the <br />59 <br />