Also, under the compact the tribe must look at alternatives for the location of the project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project and avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects on the environment. The Compact also requires the TEIR to evaluate then comparative merits of the alternatives, though the Tribe need not address alternatives that would cause it to forgo its right to engage in the gaming activities authorized by the Compact on its Indian lands. In other words, they do not have to consider a non-gaming alternative. In addition to the proposed project, a No-Project Alternative, a Phased Project Alternative, a Reduced Project Alternative, and a Reconfigured Access Driveway and Surface Parking Alternative are evaluated in the Draft TEIR. The “no project” alternative would not include a Class III gaming facility. Land uses or development on the Tribal lands would be consistent with applicable laws and regulations, but would not be subject to the requirements of the Compact.
Under this alternative, a range of commercial and residential projects could be constructed without a comprehensive environmental review process as is required under the Compact. Any construction project on the Tribal lands would, however, still be subject to applicable federal laws and regulations. Under this alternative, potential off-reservation environmental impacts would likely not be evaluated, and mitigation measures would not be required for any such impacts.
A Phased Project was also considered by the tribe. This alternative comprises three phases defined by the size of the gaming floor. It entails construction of the same buildings and associated facilities as does the proposed project, but would be configured with a reduced gaming floor.
Under Phase I construction a reduced gaming area of 32,900 square feet (approximately 45% of the proposed project) would be completed. The gaming floor would accommodate approximately 1,150 slot machines and 40 gaming tables.
Phase II would entail expansion of the gaming area to 53,600 square feet (approximately 75% of the proposed project). The additional gaming floor area would accommodate an additional 500 slot machines and 20 gaming tables, for a new total of 1,650 slot machines and 60 gaming tables.
Phase III would entail expansion of the gaming area to 71,525 square feet (same as the proposed project). The additional gaming floor area would accommodate an additional 350 slot machines and 20 gaming tables, for a new total of 2,000 slot machines and 80 gaming tables.
Under the Phased Project Alternative, each phase would be implemented at a time specified in an Intergovernmental Services Agreement entered into with Amador County, or at a time specified by judgment rendered in arbitration. Implementation of Phase 1 would require substantially less off-reservation mitigation than would the proposed project and would consequently be feasible to construct and operate at an earlier date than would the proposed project.
The tribe has also looked at a reduced project, with a Reduced Gaming Floor Area to 75% of Proposed Project. This alternative entails construction of the same buildings and associated facilities as the proposed project, but it would be configured with a gaming floor equivalent to 75% of the gaming floor under the proposed project (identical to Alternative 2, Phase II).
The proposed parking facility under this alternative would be the same as under the proposed project. According to the tribal report any reduction in the project design was considered but eliminated from further analysis. This design reduced the gaming floor to 10,250 square feet (approximately 350 machines and 10 gaming tables; approximately 61,275 square feet less than the proposed project). The reduced project configuration was defined primarily in terms of reduced gaming floor area (square footage roughly corresponds to number of gaming machines and gaming tables) because the gaming floor area is the principal factor in calculating vehicle trips to and from the project site and is used to identify impacts associated with traffic. A significantly reduced gaming floor would result in fewer vehicle trips to the project site, resulting in reduced traffic impacts. The reduced gaming floor alternative was eliminated from further analysis because it is not considered to be economically feasible. The income generated by the reduced gaming floor would not finance the loan debt for the project and would therefore preclude project development funding.
