Laserfiche WebLink
revenues and subventions to the City; plus. the golf course is a revenue generating public facility <br /> which incorporates user fees. And. the City will benefit from an overall increase in economic <br /> activitv from the Project, including construction related employment and recreational services <br /> employment. <br /> <br /> The City Council therefore finds and determines that the unmitigated project impacts and <br />· cumulative regional impacts are outweighed by the economic benefits of the Project to the City. <br /> <br /> FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br /> Alternative 1: NO PROJECT. <br /> <br /> Alternative 1 represents the current conditions which exist in Happy Valley today, and <br /> assumes no further development will occur, whether under the General Plan or otherwise. As <br /> such, it is the no project alternative. <br /> <br /> Based on the facts set forth below, and the information in the Draft EIR and Final EIR, <br /> Chapter 4.B., the City Council finds and determines that the no project alternative is less desirable <br /> than the Project, and rejects the no project alternative'for the following reasons: this alternative <br /> does not include any additional recreational amenities; lacks in~'astructure and improvements; <br /> provides no additional housing; and does not create any new jobs or revenues. This alternative <br /> eliminates potential enhancements to the community. <br /> <br /> Alternative 2: CURRENT PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN <br /> <br /> This alternative would result in the development of a total of 13 8 new housing units, <br /> without any golf course homes. Land use impacts would remain similar. This alternative may <br /> result in fewer impacts to wetlands and to the waters of the United States because of a smaller <br /> golf course footprint and elimination of the Bypass Road. However, a smaller golf course <br /> footprim does not remove the need for review and issuance of a permit from the Army Corp of <br /> Engineers and other regulatory bodies, as the Alternative 2 golf course would still cause <br /> biological impacts. The elimination of the Bypass Road would shi~ traffic, and while levels of <br /> service remain similar, the noise generated by the traffic would result in a noticeable increase for <br /> existing residents along Happy Valley Road, Alisal Street and Sycamore Road. <br /> <br /> Based on the facts set forth below, and the information in the Draft EIR and Final EIR, <br /> Chapter 4.B., the City Council finds and determines that Alternative 2 is less desirable than the <br /> Project, and rejects this alternative for the following reasons: <br /> <br /> 1. Noise. The elimination of the Bypass Road from the Project under Alternative 2 <br /> changes traffic patterns, which results in increased noise impacts to existing <br /> neighborhoods along Happy Valley Road, Alisal Street and Sycamore Road. <br /> Concern regarding noise is heightened in this area of the City which has been <br /> planned as semi-rural residential. <br /> <br /> Exhibit B 3 <br /> <br /> <br />