RES 201131 - Laserfiche WebLink

the Project. These factors would work against City Objective 1, in that they could result in a failure to encourage investment in the properties within the area of the Project, and a related failure to develop transportation infrastructure necessary for new retail uses. 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 Project. With its large club retail use,the Project would provide a use that is both locally and regionally accessible, suited to the location of the area of the Project near both the I-680 and the 1-580. The Project would also provide a diversity of uses, including general retail and hotel as well as the club retail use. The Reduced Retail Alternative would provide less diversity of uses, and no club retail use, as well as a lower area of total new gross building space; therefore, the mix and amount of uses that would be provided under the Reduced Retail Alternative would not serve to "maximize"the unique benefits of the location of the area of the Project as stated in City Objective 2, especially in comparison to the Project. 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 Project,the mix of uses anticipated to be developed within the area of the Project 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). Because it does not include a large retail anchor, includes a lower total area of new uses, and lacks the stability that a large retail anchor could provide (as discussed above under City Objective 1),the Reduced Retail Alternative would be much less likely to promote long-term economic growth to the same extent as the Project, and would not generate the same, substantial level of new revenues as the Project, making the full achievement of City Objective 3 less likely. c. Alternative 3,Partial Buildout (Phase I Only) Alternative 3, Partial Buildout(Phase I Only), would include some of the same uses as the Project, including general retail, club retail, and a hotel use,but would not include general retail uses to the same extent.