Laserfiche WebLink
1.Approach and Scope of Work <br /> formulated to help the County consider other project scenarios(representing <br /> reasonably achievable development schemes)in comparison to the impacts <br /> of the proposed project.ESA will analyzes at least two alternatives to the <br /> proposed in addition to the No Project. <br /> The Alternatives section will present a comparative analysis and impact <br /> matrix fora total of three alternatives to the proposed project;the <br /> "no-project"alternative and up to two"build"alternatives One alternative <br /> may address the Roth Road overpass of the railroad tracks. Another <br /> alternative may be a Smaller Expansion Alternative which has the same <br /> proposed on-site uses but at a less intense scale of operations and possibly <br /> relocation of some activities(e.g., to minimize noise or emission impacts for <br /> nearby residents).This alternative is expected to be refined as the EIR <br /> analysis proceeds. For example, if the transportation analysis identifies any <br /> significant impacts,we may determine that a specific reduction in truck trips <br /> may eliminate specific impacts. <br /> At our kick-off meeting,we would discuss with County staff(and project <br /> applicant)the option of evaluating an off-site alternative. Given this type of <br /> project,this may not be feasible. If we do address such an alternative, we <br /> would need input from the applicant on potential off-site locations,the <br /> capacity of such, and any major differences/shortcomings as compared to the <br /> project in terms of operational or construction-related impacts. For a use of <br /> this type, an off-site alternative is constrained by the availability of rail and <br /> highway facilities and this will need to be carefully documented in the EIR. <br /> The off-site alternative would be evaluated in a general way given that <br /> specific site information may not be available.We would rely on existing <br /> documentation and would not proposed any detailed site analysis.We may <br /> conclude that an off-site alternative should be addressed as an"alternative <br /> considered but rejected,"with documentation provided by the applicant. <br /> The Alternatives section will also discuss potential alternatives"considered <br /> but not analyzed in detail in the EIR,"which may include an alternative site <br /> configuration scenario, which would be formulated primarily on input <br /> provided by the project applicant. <br /> ESA will draft initial alternatives scenarios based on the environmental effects <br /> identified in the Administrative Draft ETR.The project team will refine and <br /> finalize the draft alternatives after full discussion with County staff. <br /> The narrative discussion of each alternative will consist of two subsections: <br /> 0 Description of Alternative, which will describe the distinctive <br /> characteristics and objectives as compared to the proposed project. <br /> 1-28 San Joaquin County—EIR for the Union Pacific Modernization Project <br />