3_Exhibit C - Laserfiche WebLink

accommodated due to the Hacienda Rezoning. However, this alternative would not result in additional housing units beyond the 1,128 units that have already been constructed in the City before 2014. Since the City must plan for its RHNA allocation and implement actions to comply with that allocation pursuant to the 2010 Settlement Agreement, it is not legally permissible to select the No Project Alternative, thus ignoring the proposed Housing Element and the need to rezone enough of the potential sites for rezoning to meet the RHNA mandated figure. Further, the No Project Alternative would not meet the requirements of the 2010 Settlement Agreement, which requires the City to adopt a Housing Element for the 2007-2014 planning period within 90-days of receiving comments from the Department of Housing and Community Development. Under the No Project Alternative, the Draft CAP would not be adopted and its GHG reduction measures would not be implemented. For Pleasanton, this means that it would not meet the goals AB 32, of 15 percent below 2005 baseline by 2020 (306,311 MT CO2e below base line). However, even under the No Project Alternative, the City would get credit from several high-impact state-wide measures including in the AB 32 Scoping Plan, which are estimated to be 194,017 MT CO2e. With the addition of projected impact of rising fuel prices on driving behavior described in the Draft CAP, which is estimated to translates to a equivalent to annual emissions reductions of 18,729 MT CO2e, Pleasanton would left with the challenge of reducing city-wide emissions by an additional 93,585 MT CO2e per year below business-as- usual by 2020 under the No Project Alternative. Finding: The City Council finds that this alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet many of the objectives for the Housing Element and associated General Plan amendment and rezonings to increase the City's inventory of land available for the development of housing to ensure capacity for the development of new housing to meet the RNHA at all income levels. Further, the No Project Alternative would not meet the requirements of the 2010 Settlement Agreement, which requires that the City adopt a new Housing Element and all related General Plan amendments and rezonings and a Climate Action Plan by February 17, 2012. Alternative 1, Large Properties Alternative 1, Large Properties, would result in the development of a total of 2,232 housing units to fulfill 100 percent of the RHNA and improve Pleasanton's jobs/housing balance as a means of reducing greenhouse emissions. Like the proposed project, Alternative 1 would include rezoning to accommodate future residential growth. Alternative 1 would rezone 8 of the 17 potential sites, specifically the sites that could accommodate larger developments. The larger properties could more easily address neighborhood compatibility issues through site design, and also provide high quality open space as other amenities. Alternative 1 would permit residential development on: Site 1 BART Site with 300 units Site 3 Stoneridge Mall with 300 units Site 6 Irby-Kaplan-Zia with 180 units Site 7 Gateway with 279 units