Laserfiche WebLink
measures. However, this alternative would also not distribute future development as well <br />as the proposed General Plan. <br />Environmentally Superior Alternative <br />Section 15126(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines states that an EIR must identify the <br />environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project Alternative. Although the <br />No Project Alternative would have the lowest population, it would potentially have the <br />most impacts of all of the alternatives, including the proposed General Plan, because it <br />would not contain all of the new programs to reduce impacts and to ensure sustainability <br />in the Planning Area, particularly in relation to energy use, water conservation, and water <br />quality. The inclusion of new energy -conservation programs in the Energy Element, <br />water conservation and stormwater quality programs contained in the Water Element, and <br />additional programs related to reducing greenhouse gases and the link between land use <br />and transportation in the Air Quality and Climate Change Element of the proposed <br />General Plan indicate that the proposed General Plan would be environmentally superior <br />to the No Project Alternative, as these programs are not part of the existing General Plan. <br />The proposed General Plan and all of the alternatives (including the No Project <br />Alternative) would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to inconsistencies <br />with growth assumptions underlying the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Ozone <br />Strategy. <br />There are few differences of impacts among the alternatives except that there would be <br />fewer development impacts related to the proposed General Plan as it would result in less <br />development. Except for future development effects, buildout of the proposed General <br />Plan, the Dispersed Growth Alternative, and Concentrated Residential/Mixed Use <br />Alternative would either cause or be subject to essentially the same environmental <br />effects. <br />Thus based on the above, the proposed General Plan would be the Environmentally <br />Superior Alternative. <br />FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE EIR <br />This section presents the approved project's significant environmental impacts and <br />feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California <br />Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a <br />lead agency to adopt findings for each significant environmental impact disclosed in an <br />EIR. These requirements are set forth on page 1 of this document. <br />Below are the findings for the significant impacts identified in the EIR for the proposed <br />project. Descriptions of all impacts and mitigation measures are not repeated below <br />because: (1) the City will adopt all of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR for <br />each significant environmental impact; (2) the EIR concludes that these mitigation <br />measures will avoid or substantially lessen each of the identified significant impacts, with <br />the exception of transportation and air quality , the significant and unavoidable impacts of <br />7 <br />