SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Given the traffic, air quality, and land use impacts of this project identified in the DSEIR, the EDZ clearly does not meet the standards of Sustainable Development as articulated in the General Plan. Please explain why the DSEIR did not find that the project does not comply with these very important policies to promote Sustainable Development in the City of Pleasanton. Response: Goals and policies of a General Plan are not"standards" under CEQA,and the courts have repeatedly affirmed that CEQA does not require an EIR to contain a detailed discussion of a project's consistency with a general plan. Regardless,a review of a project's consistency with General Plan goals and objectives analysis still must be conducted;however, such a review need not show that a project meets each goal completely, as all General Plans include policies and objectives that may conflict with one another. The City Council must determine whether the proposed Zone is, on balance, consistent with the General Plan.As stated in the discussion under Impact 4.B 3 in the Draft SEIR,the size and scope of the proposed Zone would result in a relatively large volume of criteria pollutants.The proposed Zone would also incrementally increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT)per household and per capita.These two factors resulted in the finding in the Draft SEIR that the proposed Zone would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Plan.This same situation would likely arise in any nearby community with the introduction of a large retail store that attracts vehicle trips from a relatively large geographic area. The analysis contained in the Draft SEIR addresses potential impacts of the Zone as they relate to specific environmental issue areas identified by CEQA.As such,the analysis in the Draft SEIR addresses potential impacts to Air Quality in Section 4.B Air Quality.Additionally, potential impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions are addressed in Section 4.E Other Topics. The more generic term of sustainability is somewhat subjective and is only addressed under CEQA with regard to streamlining of transit priority projects pursuant to a"sustainable communities strategy."The proposed Zone does not include residential uses and therefore does not qualify as a transit priority project. The Draft SEIR identified a significant and unavoidable air quality impact with respect to potential conflicts with the latest Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan(CAP)on page 4.B-21, largely as a result of a cumulatively considerable contribution of nitrogen oxide(NOx)emissions, a precursor to ozone which is a regional criteria air pollutant and emissions of particulate matter(PM 10) in Impact 4.B-3. Additionally, Impact 4.B-2 also identifies a significant NOx and PM 10 emission impact with regard to emissions of criteria air pollutants. These impacts are identified as significant and unavoidable after implementation of feasible mitigation measures identified by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association(CAPCOA). However,with regard to greenhouse gas emissions,page 4.E-25 of the Draft SEIR indicates that the GHG emissions reductions achieved under the proposed Zone compared to a business-as-usual 2005 baseline would be below both the statewide goal under AB32 as well as below the City of Pleasanton's goal in its Climate Action Plan. Consequently the proposed Zone would reduce GHG emissions compared to a business-as-usual scenario.