PC-91-018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Element guidelines and City noise ordinance requirements. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The EIR prepared for the project considered the following alternatives to the project. The reasons each alternative is found infeasible or feasible follows the description of the alternative. A. No-Project Alternative This alternative would not adopt the planned unit development plan, leaving the project site in its current state without such plan. This alternative would delay development of the site and maintain current grazing and passive open space uses. The FEIR indicates on page 11-2 that with the No- Project Alternative, all development-related impacts of the project would be avoided. Finding: Infeasible The No-Project Alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proj ect, and rej ects the No- Project Alternative, for the following reasons: 1. Mitigation measures incorporated into the project, or conditions of approval which will be imposed on the specific approvals for development of the project site, have substantially mitigate, or will substantially mitigate, all of the environmental effects of the project, thereby diminishing or obviating the perceived mitigating benefits of adopting the No-Project Alternative; 2. Specifically, the project incorporates the dedication of an extensive open space area. Implementation of this alternative is not necessary in order to mitigate to an insignificant level the various effects of the project; 3. The No-Project Alternative would eliminate a potential source of funding for school facility and water pump1ng capacity improvements to help serve the wider community and Mirador Avenue extension to improve traffic circulation in the neighborhood. 4. Preservation of open space is not an explicit General Plan objective for the project site,