Res96 12834 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

not substantially reduce significant impacts but would result in increased impacts on adjacent properties. Although this alternative is feasible, it would not meet project objectives. 4.3.3 Confine Development to Improved Parcels Description of the Alternative: The Redwood Peninsula EIR includes an alternative that would retain portions of the Redwood Peninsula in open space. The areas included in this category are those that, according to the Redwood Peninsula EIR, "would require major improvements (access roads, bridges, utilities, new dikes, etc.)." (Redwood Peninsula EIR, p. X-9.) The Project site is included in the areas that would remain undeveloped under this alternative. Comparison of thc Alternative to the Project: The Redwood Peninsula EIR concluded that this alternative would result in fewer foundation problems, seismic risks, air quality effects, and impacts on water quality, biology, ecology, noise, traffic, and demands on public services. It also states that the alternative "may be feasible." This is no longer the ease, however. Existing approvals contemplate the development of office space on the Project site. Therefore, even if the Project were not approved, development would occur on the site. The GID hereby finds that the Confine Development to Improved Parcels Alternative is environmentally superior to the Project. The GID further finds that this alternative is infeasible and would not meet the objectives of the Project. 4.3.4 Develop for Agricultural or Recreational Use Description of the Alternative: The Redwood Peninsula EIR includes alternatives that would designate the entire undeveloped portion of the Redwood Peninsula for agricultural or recreational uses. Because the Redwood Peninsula EIR concludes that the environmental impacts of both uses would be similar, this section discusses both alternatives. Agricultural use could involve field crops, greenhouses or both. Recreational uses could range from park lands to athletic fields to race courses. Comparison of the Alternative to the Pro,ieet: The Redwood Peninsula EIR concluded that the impacts of these alternatives would depend upon the precise uses involved. In general, however, the alternatives would result in fewer geotechnical problems, meteorological effects, air pollution and demands on public services. Other impacts would he either greater or lesser, depending on the proposal. For example, although traffic impacts might decrease, impacts on water quality could increase. -39- GIDEIRFD.DOC 7/23/96 5:44 PM