Planning Commission Agenda Packet 09092026

City of Pleasanton—Additional Housing Sites Rezonings Project CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 Addendum Addendum 125 b) Vehicle Miles Traveled Would the project: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Summary of Prior FEIR This checklist question was added to the CEQA Guidelines after certification of the Prior FEIR and was not previously a separate City CEQA threshold for traffic. However, the Prior FEIR addressed VMT in the Air Quality and Climate Change section under Impact AQ-1, and VMT was found to have a significant and unavoidable impact, for which the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations in certifying the Prior FEIR. Consistent with PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 through 15164, the purpose of this Addendum is to determine whether the proposed project would result in new significant environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or new information of substantial importance that would require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. Although VMT was a known metric at the time, because the prior environmental document was prepared before the statewide transition to VMT as the metric for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, VMT does not constitute “new information” within the meaning of Section 15162, subdivision (a)(3). Rather, it reflects a change in analytical methodology, not a change in the physical environmental impacts of the project or the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken. As such, the inclusion of a VMT analysis in this Addendum is not required to support the CEQA determination and is provided for informational purposes only. Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion A program-level VMT analysis was prepared to evaluate the proposed project under cumulative (2040) conditions. The analysis evaluated both home-based VMT per resident and total VMT per service population, using a threshold of significance defined as 15 percent below the Alameda County average. Under the 2040 Plus Project conditions, the proposed sites would generate home-based VMT per resident (14.2) below the applicable threshold (15.2), and total VMT per service population (18.9) would also remain below the applicable threshold (22.1); thus, the proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts than discussed in the Prior FEIR. Although Site B exceeds the per-resident VMT threshold when evaluated individually (19.4),