My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0004094
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
K
>
KOSTER
>
36736
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
QX-01-0002
>
SU0004094
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2020 1:02:10 PM
Creation date
9/6/2019 10:43:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0004094
FACILITY_NAME
QX-01-0002
STREET_NUMBER
36736
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
KOSTER
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
ENTERED_DATE
5/12/2004 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
36736 S KOSTER RD
RECEIVED_DATE
1/8/2002 12:00:00 AM
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\K\KOSTER\36736\QX-01-02_PA-0200065\SU0004094\EIR 2004.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2073
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r <br /> a.. <br /> CHAPTER 5 <br /> ALTERNATIVES <br /> r <br /> 5.1 INTRODUCTION <br /> The purpose of the alternatives analysis in an EIR is to describe a range of reasonable alternatives <br /> to the project,or to the project location,that could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the <br /> project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and to <br /> evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives(CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[a]). <br /> r <br /> Additionally, Section 15126.6(b)of the CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of alternatives <br /> that could reduce to a less-than-significant level or eliminate any significant adverse <br /> ` environmental effects of the Proposed Project,including alternatives that may be more costly or <br /> could otherwise impede to some degree the attainment of the project's objectives. The range of <br /> alternatives considered must include those that offer substantial environmental advantages over <br /> a. the Proposed Project and may be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner considering <br /> economic,environmental, social,technological, and legal factors. <br /> FACTORS IN SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> The CEQA Guidelines suggest,but do not explicitly require,that an EIR should briefly describe <br /> — the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed, identify any alternatives that were <br /> considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible, and briefly explain the reasons <br /> underlying the lead agency's determination [CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(c)]. <br /> The alternatives addressed in this EIR were selected in consideration of one or more of the <br /> following factors: <br /> r <br /> • The extent to which the alternative would accomplish most of the basic goals and <br /> objectives of the project(See Chapter 3.0,Project Description); <br /> • The extent to which the alternative would avoid or lessen any of the identified significant <br /> environmental effects of the project; <br /> — • The feasibility of the alternative,taking into account site suitability,economic viability, <br /> availability of infrastructure, General Plan consistency,and consistency with other <br /> applicable plans and regulatory limitations; <br /> — <br /> • The appropriateness of the alternative in contributing to a"reasonable range"of <br /> alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice;and <br /> y <br /> RMC Pack Vem"s Quarry Muting and Reclamation Project 5-1 FSA/203015 <br /> Administrative Draft©R March 2004 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.