ARCHIVED REPORTS_2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

............._.. V. IMPACT OVERVIEW roadways used as haul routes would be incremental) lower. Impacts to adjacent industrial uses Y P J would be similar to that of the project. Cultural Resources: The reduced-scale alternative would have little effect on cultural resources because under this scenario the project would be comparable to the proposed project, including construction of a below-grade loadout area that would require excavation. The chance of encountering cultural resources during excavation would be equally remote as with the proposed project, and the same mitigations would apply. Hydrology and Water Quality: Because the container storage area would have two access roadways paved across it, as it would under the project, there would be a slight increase in impervious surfaces and the same potential increase in runoff as with the project. The construction of the sort line and transfer station building would have the same potential to alter site drainage. Therefore this alternative would have similar impacts on hydrology and water quality and the same mitigation measures would apply. Public Health and Safety. The risk of accidental exposure workers and the environment to household hazardous wastes inadvertently commingled with solid waste would also exist under the Reduced-Scale Alternative. However, because less solid waste overall would be processed at the transfer station, the risk would be somewhat reduced. Similarly, the potential impacts of noise from the tub grinder and other project equipment would be somewhat reduced, since the equipment would be operated somewhat less continuously under the Reduced-Scale Alternative. However,this alternative would pose the potential impacts to public health and safety would be similar under this alternative,albeit somewhat reduced, and the Mitigation Measures G.1 through GA would also apply. Other considerations. Because the transfer station would have less capacity to receive and P Y process waste, this alternative would result in less potential benefit of recovering materials for recycling or composting. C. OFF-SITE ALTERNATIVE To compare the relative impacts of developing the project at an alternative Stockton location,this analysis sought to identify a vacant industrial parcel of approximately 5 acres with reasonable access to area roadways and served by basic public utility infrastructure. The following two areas were initially considered for prospect sites but determined to be infeasible: (1)Except for proximity to the airport,the abundance of industrially-designated land in the vicinity of the Stockton Metropolitan Airport would have provided multiple potential sites. However,due to the potential conflict between birds that may be attracted to the transfer station and airport air traffic, this area was deemed inappropriate for transfer station development. Federal Aviation Administration guidelines (FAA, 1985) consider solid waste facilities within 3,000 meters (approximately 9843 feet, or roughly 2 miles) of runways used for turbojet aircraft to be incompatible uses. Although FAA guidance refers specifically to solid waste disposal facilities, the same concern about potential interference with aircraft operations by birds attracted to a solid waste facility would apply to a transfer station. Therefore, sites within this distance of the airport Stockton Scavenger Transfer Station Expansion VA ESA/990190