SU0004094 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative t. associated with this alternative would be similar or could be greater,depending on the outcome of the necessary assessment,than those associated with the project. Visual Resources The off-site alternative is located within the same general viewing area as the project. The visual character of the area is similar to the project, predominantly rural and agricultural with some mining operations in the area. Mining operations at the off-site alternative has the potential to impact scenic views of the Coastal Range Mountains and San Joaquin Valley and to conflict with adopted Plans and Policies relating to visual resources. Visual resources impacts associated with �. this alternative would be similar to those associated with the project. Mitigation measures similar to those identified in Section 4.12 would be required. 5.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative Table 5-3 provides a summary of the evaluation of the alternatives compared to the project. As shown in Table 5-3, the No Project Alternative would result in the avoidance of all the significant,unavoidable impacts of the project. Although the No Project Alternative would be considered the environmentally superior alternative, it does not fulfill the objectives of the 1r project. In addition, CEQA requires that the EIR identify an environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project. The other alternatives that were considered and analyzed in this section serve to reduce some of the impacts,and one alternative would reduce the significant impact to Hospital Creek. However, none of the alternatives considered, other than the No Project Alternative,would reduce all of the 6. significant impacts(mining of Hospital Creek,NOx emissions, and construction- and operation- related noise)of the project to less than significant levels. 6. The Alternative 2—Scenario 2 is the only alternative to the project that reduces one of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. This alternative eliminates the area of Hospital Creek from proposed mining activities. If Hospital 1111' Creek were to be mined out as proposed in the project(under Mining Plan Option 2), this would permanently remove surface water flows from the reach of Hospital Creek downstream of the proposed mining operations, leading to depletion of flows to downstream receiving water bodies, ` reduction of surface water available for localized infiltration,or elimination of adequate water flow for aquatic and riparian habitats. It should be noted;however,that the project could also be ` approved under Mining Plan Option 1,which would avoid the significant impacts to Hospital Creek. Therefore, the significant and unavoidable impact could also be avoided with implementation of the project itself if Mining Plan Option 1 is approved rather than Mining Plan r, Option 2. Scenario 2 also reduces the significant and unavoidable noise impacts to three sensitive receptors(RI, R2,and R3,although not to a less than significant level). Scenario 2 also substantially reduces the exposure of three sensitive receptors(RI, R2,and R3)to DPM,although ►. not to a less than significant level. It should also be noted that Alternative 2-Scenario 2 would result in having to look for another �. site to mine aggregate sooner than with the project because the lifespan of the project would be reduced to 15 to 36 years instead of the 25 to 60 years of the project. Therefore, this alternative I RMC Pacific Vernalis Quarry Mining and Reclamation Project 5-19 ESA/203015 Draft Environmental Impact Report May 2006 t.