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