SU0004094 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the intersection of Blewett Road and Koster Road would be reduced since the trucks would enter and leave the site from Blewett Road and not be stopping or making turns at the intersection. Noise and air quality would remain the same because the number of truck trips per day would not change. However, the visual impacts would be increased as the structures and equipment associated with the plant site would be more visible for those traveling along Blewett Road. hi addition, the plant site would be situated in closer proximity to residences R-4 and R-5, located adjacent to the east side of the project site, along Blewett Road. All other impacts would remain the same as those of the proposed project. (Draft EIR, p. 5-3.) If the plant site were to be moved to the east side of the project site, in the Phase VI or VII areas, this would put the plant site further from Blewett Road and the residences located along Blewett Road (R-4 through R-8). Visual impacts would be reduced for those living and traveling along Blewett Road. However, an access road from Blewett Road back to that portion of the project site would have to be constructed. This would create additional temporary construction impacts, including dust and noise. The location of this access road would put the entrance and exit to the project site to the east of several residences located on Blewett Road, east of Koster Road (R-4 through R-8). This would increase truck traffic along Blewett Road and past several additional sensitive receptors that would not be affected with the proposed project. All other impacts would remain the same as those of the proposed project. (Draft EIR,p. 5-3.) If the plant site were to be moved further south along Koster Road into Phase II or III, there would be an increased buffer of land between the plant site and Blewett Road and the visual impacts would be reduced for those living and traveling along Blewett Road. However, since Koster Road crosses over the Delta-Mendota Canal before these phases, the existing dirt road on the east side of the canal would need to be improved for truck traffic. This would create additional temporary construction impacts, including dust and noise. hi addition, this location would put the plant site closer to a residence located on the west side of the Delta-Mendota Canal, potentially increasing the visual and noise impacts to that sensitive receptor. All other impacts would remain the same as those of the proposed project. (Draft EIR,p. 5-3; Final EIR, p. 4-1 (discussion of revised project phasing).) This alternative processing plant location was considered during the scoping process but was eliminated from further consideration. Although this alternative may have reduced some of the impacts as compared to the proposed Project, other impacts would have been greater. (Draft EK p. 5-2.) E.1.2. Extraction of Aimegate Below the Groundwater Level Another alternative to the proposed project which was considered early in the process but eliminated from further consideration was deep pit mining below the groundwater level. It is suspected that additional high quality aggregate material exists below the existing groundwater level and could be extracted with dewatering techniques or a` vet"mining operation. The option has the potential to reduce the extent of the footprint of the mine. (Draft EIR, pp. 5-3 to 5-4.) The San Joaquin County Title, Section 9-1415.3(u)requires an impact evaluation for quarry excavations below the groundwater level of the uppermost aquifer. Should additional resources exist below the groundwater level, the extraction of them may be a more environmentally 41