Laserfiche WebLink
Scenario 1: Cultural resources were not identified on the project site. A reduction in mining <br /> operation would not reduce the amount of land disturbed and the potential for disturbance of <br /> unknown resource. Therefore,potential impacts under this alternative would be similar to those <br /> of the project. Mitigation identified for the project would be applicable under this scenario. <br /> Scenario 2: Cultural resources were not identified on the project site. A reduction in the number <br /> of phases that would be mined would reduce the amount of land disturbed and the potential for <br /> disturbance of unknown resources. However,this would not reduce impacts to cultural resources <br /> in the areas that would continue to be a part of the project. Impacts under this alternative would <br /> be similar to those of the project. Mitigation identified for the project would be applicable under <br /> this scenario. (Draft EIR, p. 5-13.) <br /> Hazards and Hazardous Materials <br /> Scenario 1: A reduction in the mining operation would not result in a significant reduction in the <br /> amount of hazardous materials stored and used at the site for the mining processes. Excavation, <br /> grading and construction activities would still occur at the site, during which hazardous materials <br /> would be brought onto the site. The silt ponds and mining pits would still have the potential to <br /> contain water that would be an attractant to disease vectoring mosquitoes. Impacts under this <br /> alternative would be similar to those of the project. Mitigation identified for the project would be <br /> applicable under this scenario. <br /> Scenario 2: A reduction in the number of phases to be mined would not result in a significant <br /> reduction in the amount of hazardous materials stored and used at the site for the mining <br /> processes. Excavation, grading and construction activities would still occur at the site, during <br /> which hazardous materials would be brought onto the site. The silt ponds and mining pits would <br /> still have the potential to contain water that would be an attractant to disease vectoring <br /> mosquitoes. Impacts under this alternative would be similar to those of the project. Mitigation <br /> identified for the project would be applicable under this scenario. (Draft EIR,pp. 5-13 to 5-14.) <br /> Visual Resources <br /> Scenario 1: A reduction in the mining operations would not result in a reduction in visual <br /> impacts to the surrounding area. The scenic views of the Coastal Range Mountains and San <br /> Joaquin Valley would still be hindered from nearby residents and those traveling along local <br /> roads. Impacts would be similar to those of the project. <br /> Scenario 2: A reduction in the number of phases to be mined would result in a reduction in visual <br /> impacts to the residences located west of the Delta-Mendota Canal,which are closest to Phase <br /> IV. <br /> The scenic views of the Coastal Range Mountains and San Joaquin Valley would still be <br /> hindered from nearby residents and those traveling along local roads. Impacts would be similar <br /> to those of the project. (Draft EIR,p. 5-14; Final EIR, p. 4-1 (discussion of revised phasing).) <br /> Findings: <br /> Scenario 2 is the only alternative to the project that reduces one of the significant and <br /> 51 <br />