SU0004916 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Table 5-8 Comparison of Impacts of the Proposed Project to Those of the Alternatives Environmental Issues Alternatives No Project MHMP Buildout Traffic/Air Quality (No Development) Reduction Land Use and Agriculture Lesser Similar Similar General Plan Policies and Zoning Lesser Lesser Similar Public Services Lesser Greater Lesser Public Utilities Lesser Greater Similar Cultural Resources Lesser Similar Similar Drainage Lesser Greater Similar Water Quality Not Comparable Greater Similar Public Health and Safety Lesser Greater Similar Biological Resources Lesser Similar Similar Transportation Lesser Similar Lesser �. Air Quality Lesser Greater Lesser Noise Lesser Greater Greater Visual Resources Lesser Similar Similar Totals Greater Impacts 0 7 1 Lesser Impacts 12 1 3 Similar Impacts 0 5 9 Not Comparable 1 0 0 Source: Data compiled by EDAW in 2005 The No-Project Alternative would have less of an impact than the proposed project for most of the environmental issues evaluated.More importantly, it would avoid the significant and unavoidable agricultural (farmland _ conversion),transportation(LOS impacts on I-205, I-580, and Altamont Pass Road), air quality(TACs and regional emissions of criteria pollutants), and visual quality(alteration of visual character)impacts of the proposed project.For these reasons,the No-Project Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. This alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed project or the MIRAP. CEQA requires that when the No-Project Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative,an environmentally superior alternative must be identified from among the remaining alternatives. Given that the Traffic/Air Emissions Reduction Alternative would reduce impacts in several issue areas,including traffic and air quality as compared to the proposed project; it is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. It would reduce impacts on public services,transportation,air quality, and noise and would not result in greater impacts than the proposed project in any of the issue areas.More importantly, although it would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project,it would reduce two of these: transportation (LOS impacts on I-205, I-580,and Altamont Pass Road) and air quality(regional emissions of criteria pollutants). College Park at Mountain House Specific Plan III Draft EIR EDAW San Joaquin County 5-27 Alternatives to the Proposed Project