SU0004916 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Table 5-1 identifies the development that would occur at the College Park project site under each of these alternatives as well as under the proposed project. The proposed project is evaluated in Chapter 4,`Environmental Setting,Impacts,and Mitigation Measures." Listed in Table 5-2 are the environmental issues evaluated in this Draft EIR and the level of significance of project impacts in each issue area before and after implementation of mitigation.As indicated,the proposed project would result in significant impacts in all environmental issues evaluated,with the exception of public utilities,before mitigation and would result in significant and unavoidable agricultural(farmland conversion), transportation(level of service [LOS] impacts on Interstate 205 [1-205], Interstate 580 [I-580],and Altamont Pass Road),air quality(toxic air contaminants and regional emissions of criteria pollutants),and visual quality — (alteration of visual character)impacts after implementation of mitigation. Below,each alternative is described and a qualitative analysis is provided of the alternative for each environmental issue area evaluated in this Elft.The analysis is comparative, identifying whether the alternative would result in a "Greater,""Lesser,""Not comparable,"or"Similar"impact compared to the proposed project.This determination is presented in bold,bracketed text at the end of the discussion for each environmental issue analyzed. Unless otherwise stated,the impacts used in comparisons of significant impacts of the proposed project and the alternatives in this chapter are unmitigated impacts. 5.2.1 NO-PROJECT (NO-DEVELOPMENT) ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTION — Under the No-Project(No-Development)Alternative,development of the College Park project site would not occur. Conditions at the 815-acre project site would remain as they currently exist.Uses at the site include fallow and — productive agricultural uses,including alfalfa,sugar beets,and com crops;two dairies;agricultural irrigation ditches;farm roads;2 acres of potential wetlands; and 55 very-low-density residential units.The one exception to existing conditions involves the 18 existing parcels on the project site where no residences currently exist.Because the County Code permits one residence per parcel by right of zone(as a ministerial rather than a discretionary action),one unit is assumed on each of these 18 parcels under this alternative,which brings the total residential unit count under this alternative to 73 units(55 existing units plus 18 potential f rtuue units),resulting in 752 acres of _ agricultural uses,2 acres of potential wetlands,and 61.6 acres of very-low-density residential units("fable 5-1). None of the off-site infrastructure facilities required to serve the proposed project would be developed,except for infrastructure that is planned or has already been approved or developed as part of the related projects identified in Chapter 3,"Project Description"(e.g.,Mountain House Creek Improvement Project,I-205/Mountain House Parkway Project Study Report).None of the entitlements being sought under the College Park project, such as annexing the Delta College site to the Mountain House Community Services District(MHCSD)or including a — portion of the Specific Plan I area at the northwest comer of I-205 and Mountain House Parkway on the College Park site,would occur.The community college would not be developed because the San Joaquin Delta Community College District(SJDCCD)would not obtain the required approvals from San Joaquin County. — Evaluation of the No-Project Alternative is required by CEQA and allows for a comparison of the environmental impacts of not developing the College Park site to developing the College Park site under the proposed project. EDAW College Park at Mountain House Specific Plan III Draft EIR AHematives to the Proposed Project 5-2 San Joaquin County