RES 06035 - Laserfiche WebLink

CHAPTER 5 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT The CEQA "project" is the Bernal Property Phase II Specific Plan together with the Master Plan for the Bernal Community Park contained within the Specific Plan area. Alternatives to this project are described briefly in Chapter 3. The project and Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 are shown in Figures 6, 7,8, and 9. This chapter reviews and discusses alternatives to the project, with a focus on Alternatives 1 and 2. These two alternatives represent differences from the project and from each other in the set of land uses they would provide. Alternative 3, the conceptual Phase II Specific Plan as mapped in the Phase I Specific Plan, is not given the same level of review because (1) the flexibility ofthat plan was broad enough to have "covered" any of the three land use pack- ages currently being considered (the Specific Plan project, Alternative 1, and Alternative 2) and (2) two uses (golf and housing) that would have sharply differentiated Alternative 3 from the other options were rendered infeasible in the period following approval of the Phase I Specific Plan (see pp. 28-29). At its meeting August 16, 2005, the Pleasanton City Council confirmed the alternatives to be reviewed in the Phase II Specific Plan EIR.s2. 1. CEQA Requirements The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that alternatives to the proposed project be considered in the EIR. CEQA guidelines relating to the presentation of the project alternatives in an EIR are presented in the box on the following page. 2. Alternatives 1 and 2 as Formulated in the Specific Plan Process A key aspect of the proposed Specific Plan is that it does not commit to a "final" set of land uses, but rather includes an array of potential land uses (listed in Appendix B of this EIR). Chapter 3 on the environmental review process discusses the evolution of the project as it is now proposed: the Phase II Specific Plan and, within it, the Master Plan for the Bernal Community Park (BCP). In the course of this evolution, many possible variations in the makeup of the Specific Plan were considered, shaped by varying the sets of uses included from among the common set of potential uses, varying the sub-areas in which the included uses are located, and by making modest adjustments in the shape and acreage of the sub- areas to accommodate these arrangements. 52 The selection of alternatives for CEQA review was based on considerations that included the City's basic project objectives, the feasibility of development of particular uses at particular sites, and the potential environmental impacts of various uses at various sites. 161