09 ATTACHMENT 3 - Laserfiche WebLink

March 23, 2006 Page 5 under the existing noise scope; the forecast of cumulative traffic, by distinguishing the traffic contributions of those two projects from each other, will allow the noise analysis to distinguish their cumulative noise impacts as well. This approach assumes that traffic from these two projects will not contribute significantly to noise at those intersections where Oak Grove-generated traffic will be greatest, and vice versa. If this assumption proves incorrect, then the approach to the three-project noise analysis will have to be revisited, and a budget adjustment would be necessary. K. OPEN SPACE Each project's EIR will include, in the Open Space section of the project analysis, a table that shows total acreage, acreage proposed for development (roads, drainage facilities, and other infrastructure should be included in this count), and acreage not proposed for development. Each project's EIR will include, in the Cumulative section, a table that includes each of the three projects (and the total for the three projects) showing total acreage, acreage proposed for development (roads, drainage facilities, and other infrastructure should be included in this count), and acreage not proposed for development. L. POPULATION AND HOUSING In view of the fact that these projects are envisioned by the General Plan, the General Plan cumulative analysis covers them. A supplemental cumulative analysis limited to the three projects is not proposed. M. PUBLIC SERVICES Public services other than N. Parks and Recreation and P. Utilities and Service Systems consist of education, police, and fire protection. The impacts of each project on those services would be addressed at the project level. The approach to the cumulative analysis would involve three tasks: M1. Create a consolidated summary of individual project impacts. M2. Based on Ml, identify potential shortfalls in service provision at the project level and translate any such shortfalls to potential system-level shortfalls. M3. Review findings with service providers for concurrence or correction. M4. Identify potential mitigations in consultation with service providers. N. PARKS AND RECREATION No three-project cumulative analysis of these topics was proposed in our initial "approach" memo of June 27. Since then, staff has raised a question about possible effects on parks in case one or more projects should place greater demand on park resources than the existing and planned set of Pleasanton parks can meet. Tentatively, we believe that there may be a cumulative impact on community parks. The following approach is proposed: N1. Develop a list of Pleasanton community park resources in consultation with staff of the Recreation and Park Department. ~~~il. ~ ~.;~ ~ , u:,ir ti~,o °>tn. ::r f~~t~:.~c. (',i ~).:;(5 ; ;11 ~n:a! ,.. }1 .:! `~,. }rr,.ic c.t ~ u.