SU0007861 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Draft Environmental Impact Report Page V-6 Forward Landfill Expansion C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THIS EIR This EIR describes and analyzes the comparative environmental impacts of the following alternatives: • Alternative 1: No Project Alternative • Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternative. Alternative 1: No Project Description This alternative assumes that the proposed Forward Landfill consolidation and expansion project would not be implemented. The existing Austin Road and Forward Landfills, although under common ownership, would.continue to operate as separate landfills, under existing permits. Mitigations incorpoated into those existing permits would be implemented. The No Project Alternative is thus the same as the baseline (Environmental Setting)used in this EIR. i. Under the No Project Alternative,the existing Forward Landfill would continue to receive both Class II waste (designated wastes) and Class III waste (municipal solid waste), up to the permitted rate of 8,668 tons/day and 620 one-way vehicle trips, until Acurrent capacity is reached at the anticipated closure date of 2017. (The permitted rate of 8,668 tons/day includes some beneficial reuse materials and materials delivered to the materials recovery facility (MRF).) The ultimate final height would be 210 feet above Mean Sea Level(MSL). Under the No Project Alternative,the total capacity of the landfill would be approximately 39.5 million cubic yards (mcy) of airspace less than under the proposed project. Environmental Impacts Land use Most of the land use impacts of the proposed project, including the potential impacts of night lighting and bird hazards to the Stockton Metropolitan Airport,would also occur under the No Project Alternative. This alternative would not involve filling of an approximately 185-acre area south and west of the existing landfill, as would the proposed project, and the potential agricultural productivity of this land would be retained. Traffic Under the No Project Alternative, daily traffic volumes from landfill-related traffic would not change, and the facility would continue to operate from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. However,the total amount of waste disposed would be less, and there would be fewer total vehicle trips over the life of the landfill. The existing Forward Landfill would generate 620 vehicles(1,240 one-way trips) per day until closure in 2017, in contrast to the proposed project's 960 vehicles (1,920 one-way trips)lasting until 2034. Thus,this alternative would generate 680 fewer trips than the proposed project until 2017, and 1,902 fewer trips from 2018 to 2034.