RES 06035 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chapter 5 Alternatives to the Project . Residential. In the Central Area, the lands in Phase II sub-area 3 and part of sub-area 6 that are designated as "Optional Residential" in the Phase I land use diagram. As described in Chapter 3, the option of adopting a plan that incorporated either golf or residential or both was subsequently eliminated or set back by events that included Pleasanton's developing a new municipal golf course at a different site, thus making a golf course on the Bernal Property less important, the relatively low ranking given to golf in the public's priorities for the Specific Plan site, and the approval of voter initiative Measure V that prohibited construction of housing at the 318-acre City-owned portion of the Bernal Property. With residential use rendered legally infeasible and golf rendered politically infeasible, the key differences between the Phase I and Phase II plans were eliminated. In effect, Alternative 3 melded into the project and, therefore, it is not relevant to the discussion in this chapter. b. Alternative 4: No Development This alternative reflects the 318-acre project site as it currently is, without development. This alternative serves as the starting point for the environmental review. c. Alternative Uses for the Site Pleasanton has been committed, since the approval of the Bernal Property Initiative (Measure V) in November 2002, to the use of the site for public purposes. The initiative reads: "There shall be no transfer (with or without consideration), sale, or trade of any City of Pleasanton-owned land within the boundaries of this Specific Plan ('City- owned land'). All land uses on or of City-owned land within the Specific plan boundaries must be accessible by and to the public. Housing of any type is prohibited on City-owned land within the Specific Plan boundaries." Within the framework established under Measure V, a variety of public and quasi-public uses is possible, but uses not accessible to the public are not permitted. The Specific Plan process has honored the direction of Measure V in the range and character of uses it has considered and the array that it would allow (as described in Appendix B). The extensive and scrupulous consideration that decision makers and the public have given to land use choices for the site obviates the need for expansion of the array of potential uses d. Alternative Project Site A different type of alternative would be the selection of a different site. As noted in the box on p. 162, the CEQA Guidelines indicate that a different location may be a suitable alternative for consideration in an EI R. In this particular case, an alternative site does not represent a feasible alternative. Pleasan- ton acquired the site for the general public purposes currently proposed by the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan has been formulated in response to the unique location and characteristics of this property. Some of the uses proposed are not appropriate to any other site (e.g., the 165