Laserfiche WebLink
remixed (apparently including the noxious rubber)and trucked back to the project site. This is <br /> very inefficient,and results in a doubling or tripling of traffic and air quality impacts in our <br /> neighborhood. How much more efficient are sites like KRC,Granite and Teichert in Vernalis,or <br /> CMI in Hughson,where ALL of the necessary raw materials are onsite. Certainly,the impact of <br /> such assembly is nothing akin to agriculture as Munn and Perkins Noise Study expert states. <br /> I was involved with Munn and Perkins original promise to provide a noise study <br /> back in the fail of 2008! Yet we only received their first insufficient Noise Study in April 2010 <br /> (approximately 1 Y,years later)I We then recently received the second purported study. One <br /> wonders how many times they tried before they could have the trucks drive at a directed speed <br /> which lowered the decibel level. In any case,the Noise Study and the most recent"redo"of the <br /> initial study prepared by the applicant is a serious disappointment and lacks any sort of scientific <br /> credibility. It is even more disappointing that the County did not require the applicant to pay for <br /> peer review the report. The final indignity is the Study's conclusion that the NEIGHBORHOOD, <br /> not the applicant,must mitigate noise impacts,possibly year round,by closing their windows <br /> at night. Recently I have read that the closure of windows is just a suggestion and not an <br /> actually"approved" mitigation measure. If such a suggestion was actually approved as a <br /> mitigation measure, I am told it would be a new"interpretation"of environmental law yet to be <br /> seen in this state or any other. <br /> In any case, inasmuch as our neighborhood is in a PG&E district,our bills are already <br /> high. They would climb even higher were we to be forced to follow the "suggestion"to close <br /> our windows and skylights and run the air conditioner to circulate coot air as the applicant <br /> cavalierly would have us do. Currently,we all enjoy opening our windows at night to allow the <br /> cooling breezes in, uninterrupted by the daytime's constant stream of truck traffic and related <br /> noise. <br /> As it now stands,the early morning truck traffic noise from River Road and the McHenry <br /> bridge flows through open windows and skylights(we are more than 250 feet off of River Road <br /> and a quarter mile or so from the bridge). We all know that sound only carries greater at night <br /> and would become an extreme intrusion, unless of course,we "mitigated" Munn and Perkins <br /> environmental impacts by closing our windows and skylights at night. By doing so we could <br /> probably hear the sound of our PG&E meters whirring as our bills rose even higher! <br /> I hope that all of you do not accept Munn and Perkins"sound study" as the basis for any <br /> sort of blessing of their nighttime proposal. We urge you to(a)deny the Project outright or(b) <br /> require the applicant to prepare a full Environmental Impact Report on this Project. <br /> Respectfully Submitted(via email to avoid delay), <br /> James D. Mayol and Family <br />