SU0004094 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Alternative 3—Offsite Alternative–The Offsite Alternative considered an off-site alternative in the Tracy area. (Draft EIR,pp. 5-14 to 5-15.) A second off-site alternative in the Laguna Formation was considered but rejected as infeasible due to the age and volcanic clasts in the matrix of the material at the alternative site, and the high clay content, all of which would result in higher processing costs and mining and processing difficulties. (Draft EM pp. 5-20 to 5-21.) E.3. lendings Regarding Alternatives Considered in the EIR E.3.1. No Project Alternative Description The No Project Alternative is defined as the continuation of the existing condition(baseline) and trends in the project area. This alternative would involve no action on the part of San Joaquin County, Stanislaus County, or the Applicant for development of the project. Under this alternative, the proposed mining and processing would not occur, and the project site would remain as agricultural land and rural residential in its existing condition, as described in Chapter 3,Project Description, and in the setting sections of Chapter 4 of the Draft EIR. No discretionary approval would be required under this alternative. (Draft EIR, p. 5-6.) Basis for Selection The No Project Alternative is included in the EIR because the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e)(1), require that an EIR evaluate a"no project' alternative along with its impact in order to provide a comparison of the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B), the No Project Alternative discusses "the property remaining in its existing state."(Draft EIR, pp. 5-6 to 5-7.) Distinctive Environmental Characteristics The following summarizes potential impacts of the "No Project' alternative and compares them to the impacts of the proposed project: Land Use Under the No Project Alternative existing land use within the project area would remain unchanged and continue to be farmed in orchards and field crops. Hospital Creek would not be disturbed under the No Project Alternative. Any potential for conflicts with land use policies and/or adjacent land uses would not occur. (Draft EIR,p. 5-7.) Agricultural Resources Under the No Project Alternative existing land use within the project area would remain unchanged and continue to be farmed in orchards and field crops. There would be no short-term change in agricultural productivity due to impacts to soils under this alternative. The potential for agricultural resource impacts under the No Project Alternative would be less than those associated with the project. (Draft EIR, p. 5-7.) 44