11 ATTACHMENT 4 - Laserfiche WebLink

A project of 98 units of a different design to the Original project has the theoretical potential of serving as the no project alternative. Such a project, however, could require an extensive road network that, together with water lines, sewer lines, and provisions for drainage, would be not only expensive to the applicant, but undesirable and burdensome to the City as well as involving environmental impacts that could not be mitigated. Finding: Infeasible Implementing the No Project Alternative would be inconsistent with the direction of the Pleasanton General Plan, which calls for preserving large blocks of open space land by encouraging the clustering of development (Program 4.4) and for using clustered development as one of a number of site planning and design techniques to minimize impacts to water quality, including minimizing land disturbance, minimizing impervious surfaces, preserving open space, and maintaining riparian areas with buffer zones to reduce runoff into waterways (Program 17.4). Further, with a project of 98 lots, in the potential absence of significant clustering, the environmental impacts of such an alternative could be less susceptible to mitigation. The No Project alternative is, therefore, found to be infeasible. The No Development Alternative Description The Oak Grove Planned Unit Development site in its current condition comprises the no development alternative. Finding: Infeasible The Oak Grove site is designated for residential development under the Pleasanton General Plan. As noted above in the discussion of the "no project" scenario, it may reasonably be assumed that, if the current proposal should not be approved, an alternative proposal would be brought forward. No development is, therefore, not a feasible alternative under CEQA. Alternative Proiect Site A custom lot project on vacant land in Pleasanton may be possible at another site, but no site that has the physical, locational, and planning characteristics of the Oak Grove site -its size, its residential/rural density designation, and its location at the city's rural edge -has been identified. While a 98 unit project could conceivably be built at a site not on the edge of the City, a more centrally-located site is likely designated for higher density than the rural residential density that applies to this site. The combination of the General Plan designation, the size of the site, and the location, make this site unusual (possibly unique) among Pleasanton's current inventory of residential sites. Page 9 of 43