My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
090407
>
17 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2007 5:17:02 PM
Creation date
8/30/2007 5:16:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/4/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
17 ATTACHMENTS
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
325
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
reduction in number of homesites, peak hour trips would be approximately 16% to 18% <br />less than the Original Project. This reduction would, however, generate the same <br />general impacts, and would require the same mitigation measures as the Original <br />Project. <br />Alternative 3 -Transportation Alternative <br />Description <br />Alternative 3 would provide a second public road access in addition to that provided by <br />Hearst Drive into the site. The route would be toward the north through the Berlogar <br />property to a connection with New Vineyard Avenue. The rationale for this alternate <br />access road is that it could reduce project traffic on Bernal Avenue. <br />This alternative is identical to the Original Project in that it would situate 98 homes on <br />the 562 acre site. It differs from the Original Project only in the provision of this <br />supplemental access route. <br />Finding: Infeasible <br />The traffic analysis evaluating this second-road-access alternative concluded that the <br />alternative would not be successful in diverting enough project traffic to have a <br />substantial effect in reducing future congestion in Pleasanton's road network. Thus, <br />because Alternative 3 would not effectively serve the principal purpose for which it was <br />formulated, it was not subjected to an environmental analysis at the same level of detail <br />as the site plan alternatives. If it had been, it is reasonable to believe that it would be <br />found to have a number of environmental impacts -including impacts on biological <br />resources, hydrology and drainage, geology -the stability of the alternate access route <br />in an area of mapped landslides, and noise that are greater in geographic extent or <br />magnitude than the impacts of the Original Project and the other land use alternatives. <br />Alternative 4 -Environmentally Superior Alternative <br />Description <br />Alternative 4 would reduce the number of lot from 98 to 51. The lots would be situated <br />generally along streets that are generally similar in alignment to Street "A" and Courts <br />"1" through "4" in the Original Project. Lot sizes in Alternative 4 would range from <br />30,290 square feet to 90,834 square feet, with an overall average of about 48,460 <br />square feet. Two balance fill areas would be established for the placement of excess <br />soils generated from grading the roads and lots. <br />This alternative is similar to the Original Project, but differs from the Original Project in <br />the following ways: <br />Page 6 of 43 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.