|
5.2 Alternatives Evaluated in This EIR
<br /> pesticides were permitted for use on the site for the years 2000 to 2003: Amino Triazole, Sevin,
<br /> Furadan, Dicamba, Guthion, Methomyl,Methyl Parathion, Aluminum Phosphate, Strychnine,
<br /> MCPA,Dimethyla, 2,4-DB, 2,4-D Amine, Paraquat,Supracide,Disyston,Thimet, Goal 2XL,
<br /> r.
<br /> Princep Caliber 90,Glyfos, Magnify,No Foam A, Gramoxone Extra, Surflan A.S., Bufferplus,
<br /> Asana XL, Dipel DF, Nu-Film-P,Treflan HFP, Rovral fungicide, Buffercide, Kocide 101, Super
<br /> 94, Rocket DL, Hasten spray adjuvant,Phostoxin, Silwet L-77, Buctril 4EC, Weedestroy AM-40
<br /> Amine salt, Rally 40W,New Century Buffer,Ammonium Sulfate,Supracide 25-W, MSO
<br /> concentrate,Omite 6E, Britz B-85, Buccaneer, Orchard Star, Britz Silglow, and Weedar 64. In
<br /> addition,there are above ground fuel tanks on the site that contain gasoline and diesel fuel. These
<br /> are all farm tanks that are less than 500 gallons in size and are exempt from the permitting
<br /> process with the County Environmental Health Department. The potential for water quality
<br /> impacts due to the storage and use of hazardous materials would be significant under the No
<br /> r Project Alternative.
<br /> Visual Resources
<br /> y
<br /> Under the No Project Alternative existing land use at the site would remain unchanged and
<br /> continue to be orchards and field crops. Views of the Coastal Range from adjacent roadways and
<br /> ` from surrounding lands would not be obstructed. Impacts to visual resources would he less than
<br /> those associated with the project.
<br /> 5.2.2 Alternative 2-Reduced Project Production
<br /> Description
<br /> Two scenarios are considered under the Reduced Project Alternative:
<br /> • Scenario 1: The mining operation would consist of a reduction in the amount of
<br /> extraction to 1.7 to 2.85 million tons per year of aggregate materials (sand and
<br /> gravel),over the same number of years 20 to 60,for the same hours per day, using a
<br /> smaller plant,for an overall resource tonnage reduction.
<br /> • Scenario 2: This scenario would eliminate mining in Phases V and VI, resulting in
<br /> an overall reduction in the amount of land to be mined(195 acres).
<br /> ` Basis for Selection
<br /> This alternative is included in the EIR to provide a basis for comparing the impacts of a less-
<br /> intensive mining operation at the project site to those of the project. This alternative may reduce
<br /> impacts in most areas, including potentially significant impacts to traffic, air quality, noise, and
<br /> hydrology.
<br /> Distinctive Environmental Characteristics
<br /> The following summarizes potential impacts of the "Reduced Project Production"alternative and
<br /> so compares them to the impacts of the project.
<br /> RMC Pacific Vernalis Querty Mining and Reclamation Project 5-9 ESA/203015
<br /> Draft Environmental Impact Report May 2006
<br /> on
<br />
|