Draft Environmental Impact Report - East Bay Municipal Utility District

Estates Reservoir Replacement Draft Environmental Impact ReportSummaryS.5 Analysis of Project and Design AlternativesSeveral project alternatives were developed and evaluated based on the ability to reduceseismic hazard, improve water quality, and improve operational reliability, flexibility andredundancy, as well as to reduce costs. Screening of alternatives also included projectconstruction considerations such as site access, project staging, and construction scheduleas well as the potential to generate impacts to key environmental factors analyzed in thisEIR. A detailed analysis of the Project Alternatives is contained in Chapter 4 of this EIR.The alternatives considered in this EIR include: Reservoir rehabilitation and replacement alternatives at the Dingee, Estates and/orPiedmont Reservoir sites; i.e., Alternatives to the Project. Concept design alternatives for replacement storage at the Estates Reservoir site;i.e., Alternatives of the Project. No Project Alternative.Project AlternativesAlternatives to the Project include the Pressure Zone Planning Program Alternative, theoriginal project outlined in the Central Oakland Hills Cascade Pressure Zone PlanningProgram (construction of smaller tanks at the Piedmont and Estates Reservoir sites).Alternative 1, is Rehabilitation of the existing Estates and Dingee open-cut reservoirs.Alternative 2, the Proposed Project, includes construction of two replacement tanks atEstates Reservoir. Alternative 3 is construction of replacement tanks at DingeeReservoir. Alternative 4 is construction of replacement tanks at Dingee, Estates andPiedmont reservoir sites. A No Project Alternative was also analyzed.Alternative 2 was selected as the preferred project because it will resolve the problem ofexcess storage in the Dingee Pressure Zone, meet operational needs at a competitive cost(by consolidating storage at one site), and resolve seismic concerns by removing theEstates Dam embankment. The other project alternatives were eliminated based on theinability to meet the Project’s basic objectives and further reduce the potential forenvironmental impacts; they also involve construction at multiple sites and for a longerduration.Alternatives of the ProjectFive concept design options were developed, reflecting three concept categories orthemes, i.e., preservation, adaptive reuse and complete alternation. Selection criteriainclude construction cost and logistics, disposal or reuse of existing materials, fountainmaintenance and water consumption, seismic stability, import/export traffic impacts, andvisual impacts or enhancement to the surrounding community. Based on public input, thepreservation or reuse of site architecture, including fountain structures, was determined tobe costly and less attractive.sb09_001.doc S-25 7/22/2009