Laserfiche WebLink
Scenario 2: The reduction in the number of phases to be mined would reduce production years <br /> from 25 to 60 years to 15 to 36 years. However, the amount of material to be mined would <br /> remain the same as the project. The projected traffic volumes for this production volume would <br /> be similar to the project, but would occur over a shorter period of time, thus, traffic impacts <br /> would be similar. Mitigation identified for the project would be applicable under this scenario. <br /> (Draft EIR, p. 5-11.) <br /> Noise <br /> Scenario 1: A reduction in mining operation would result in a reduction in noise due to a <br /> decrease in the number of trucks traveling along the roadways. Traffic-associated noise would <br /> still increase along the roadways used to access the mine, but to a lesser extent than the project. <br /> Nearby residences would still be impacted by significant noise from the mining equipment and <br /> excavation activities as well as the mining operations. Mitigation identified for the project would <br /> be applicable under this scenario. <br /> Scenario 2: A reduction in the number of phases to be mined would still result in similar noise <br /> levels as the project. Although the amount of material to be mined over the life of the project <br /> would be reduced, the amount of material to be mined on a yearly basis would not be reduced. <br /> Impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to the project, but would occur over a <br /> shorter period of time. Nearby residences would still be impacted by significant noise from the <br /> mining equipment and excavation activities as well as the mining operations. However, impacts <br /> to three sensitive receptors (RI, R2, and R3)would be substantially reduced due to the increased <br /> setback of mining excavations. Mitigation identified for the project would be applicable under <br /> this scenario. (Draft EIR, pp. 5-11 to 5-12.) <br /> Air Quality <br /> Scenario 1: A reduction in mining operations would result in a reduction in air quality impacts <br /> due to a decrease in the number of trucks traveling along the roadways on a daily basis and over <br /> the life of the project. Construction and operation emissions would be reduced due to a decrease <br /> in the amount of aggregate to be mined and processed. Mitigation identified for the Project <br /> would be applicable under this scenario. <br /> Scenario 2: A reduction in the number of phases to be mined would result in similar impacts to <br /> air quality as the project,but would occur over a shorter period of time. However, exposure of <br /> three sensitive receptors (RI, R2, and R3) to Diesel Particulate Matter(DPM) would be <br /> substantially reduced due to the increased setback of mining excavations. Mitigation identified <br /> for the project would be applicable under this scenario. (Draft EIR, p. 5-12.) <br /> Geology and Soils/Mineral Resources <br /> Scenario 1: Reduced operations may result in fewer employees onsite; however, the issues <br /> related to seismic hazards would remain with this alternative. These impacts would be similar to <br /> those of the proposed project. Mitigation identified for the project would be applicable under this <br /> scenario. <br /> 49 <br />