SU0007882 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

No changes in noise levels would occur with the No Project Alternative. At the same time, without an increased loading ramp constructed by the project,most incoming and outgoing intemmodal trains could not be handled in one section. Most trains would have to be broken down and handled in two to three sections to fit on the existing working tracks,requiring multiple movements of yard equipment and switchets within the yard and across Roth Road, generating more noise per intermodal train handled than would be the case with an expanded loading ramp with the project. Also, the current facility would continue operating without being required to implement Mitigation Measures NOISE-la (no speed bumps within intermodal yard), lb (control of descent speeds on container handling cranes), lc (testing of hybrid powered gantry cranes) or Id (adjustment of backup alarms on mobile equipment) to reduce noise in connection with facility operations). 5.1.2 Relation to Project Objectives This alternative would not meet any of the project objectives for the proposed project described in the DEIR, as no changes to the existing UP facility would occur. 5.1.3 Feasibility The No Project Alternative is infeasible because it would not meet the project objectives. This alternative would not provide any of the specific social, economic, and other project benefits outlined above or in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 5.2 REDUCED DEVELOPMENT This alternative assumes buildout of Phase I only,without completion of Phase II. Thus, the capacity would be increased to 400,000 annual cargo lifts rather than the 730,000 lifts proposed with full buildout of the j project. Approximately 43 fewer acres of adjacent agricultural lands (50 acres total)would be needed with the Reduced Development Alternative. However, the layout for the facility would look very similar to what is proposed with the proposed project. As for the proposed project, the loading ramp would be elongated and the gate entrance would be relocated to the northeast comer of the facility to reduce internal circulation conflicts. A new gate and new maintenance building would be constructed. This alternative would include reduced acreage for parking of containers and less support track near the loading ramp area. According to Union Pacific,this Reduced Development Alternative would only meet projected demand until about 2021. 5.2.1 Environmental Effects Implementation of the Reduced Development Alternative would reduce impacts related to: agricultural resources,aesthetics,biological resources,cultural resources,noise, hazards and hazardous materials (except with respect to the former wastewater ponds of the adjacent cheese factory), public services and utilities and service systems. There would be no change in impacts to geology and soils. It is assumed that this alternative would include on-site evaporation ponds as proposed for the full project and potential groundwater quality impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Regarding hydrology and water quality, the need for improved onsite stormwater drainage would also occur under this alternative, but would be slightly reduced due to the reduced area of impervious surface acreage. Implementation of the Reduced Development Alternative would reduce some impacts related to traffic. At the same time,however, one intermodal train can transport the same amount of cargo as 280 trucks. If some of the cargo containers originally assumed for the proposed project were instead shipped by truck (vs. rail), truck traffic within the region could significantly increase with the Reduced Development Alternative as compared to the proposed project. November 2012 31 Findings of Fact/ Statement of Overriding Considerations