SU0014502 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Report Gill Medical Center Project 6.3 Comparative Analysis of Project Alternatives 6.3.1 Introduction This section examines the potential environmental impacts associated with each alternative relative to the Project. Through comparison of these alternatives to the Project, the relative environmental advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are evaluated. The comparative analysis is first presented for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), the only impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in this draft EIR. Due to their relationship, the comparison of VMT and GHG to those of the proposed Project is combined in the discussion below. This is followed by comparison of other draft EIR Chapter 4.0 issue areas where impacts were found to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated and includes the following:Agriculture and Forestry, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Hydrology and Water Quality. Project impacts to issue areas found to be less than significant in this draft EIR would similarly be less than significant under the alternatives. These issue areas are briefly addressed below in section 6.4.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative Determination and in Table 6-1. Following the impact comparisons, the environmentally superior alternative is identified. 6.3.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions 6.3.2.1 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed hospitals and medical office building, onsite circulation, parking, water, wastewater and storm drain improvements would not be constructed and the proposed medical services would not be offered at the Project site. When compared to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would have no VMT impact nor would it produce direct construction or operational air emissions, including GHG emissions, eliminating these significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project. However, without more strategically located medical facilities, patients and medical workers in the medically underserved north Stockton area would continue to travel to existing hospitals in the greater Sacramento and Bay Areas, contributing to ongoing area wide VMT and greenhouse gas emissions. In summary, while implementation of Alternative 1 would eliminate Project generated significant and unavoidable VMT and GHG impacts identified in this draft EIR, regional VMT and GHG emissions associated with medical patient and worker vehicle trips in the north Stockton area would remain mostly unchanged. 6.3.2.2 Alternative 2: Reduced Project— Phase 1 Hospital Only Under the Reduced Project Alternative, VMT and GHG impacts would be limited to construction and operation of Phase 1 Project components only. When compared to full buildout, Alternative 2 would result in a corresponding reduction to offsite and area-wide impacts related to VMT and GHG emissions, both identified as significant and unavoidable impacts in this draft EIR. Medical services offered under Alternative 2 at the Phase 1 hospital would include emergency room, labor, delivery, emergent medicine, Alternatives 6-7 October 2021