2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01

Home Browse Search

7. Alternatives to the Proposed Proiect 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.1.1 Purpose and Scope The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR ) include a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that would "feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). This chapter identifies potential alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them, as required by CEQA. Key provisions of the CEQA Guidelines on alternatives (Section 15126.6[a] through [f]) are summarized below to explain the foundation and legal requirements for the alternatives analysis in the EIR. ■ "The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly' (15126.6[b]). ■ "The specific alternative of `no project' shall also be evaluated along with its impact" (15126.6[c][1]). ■ "The no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published, and at the time the environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the `no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" (15126.6[e] [2]). ■ "The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a `rule of reason' that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project" (15126.6[f]). ■ `Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent)" (15126.6 [f] [1]). October 2014 Page 7 -1