SU0012793 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V Furthermore,the Planning Commission has considered alternatives to the Project and makes the following finding: Finding Feasible alternatives to the proposed project that are capable of reducing identified,significant, adverse impacts have been considered and rejected because the alternatives offer a reduced level of benefits when compared with the project. Four project alternatives were analyzed in the EIR, including the no-project alternative,an off-site alternative site, and two alternatives using the existing landfill footprint. The no-project alternative was rejected because it would fail to meet the project objectives of providing long-term disposal capacity at the Austin Road Landfill,and would likely entail increased haul distances and disposal costs. The off-site alternative would involve disposal at the Foothill Landfill,located in east San Joaquin County approximately 25 miles east of the City of Stockton. This alternative would have fewer impacts on Swainson's Hawk habitat and surface water quality,and greater noise impacts on residents living along the haul routes. This alternative would meet the project objectives of providing long-term disposal capacity,but was rejected because waste transfer trucks would have to travel 64 miles per round trip more than the haul distance for the proposed project. The Current-Footprint-With-Increased-ElevationAltcrnative would increase the height of the permitted landfill from 90 feet MSL to 150 feet MSL, and would not realign the North Branch of the South Fork of Little Johns Creek. This alternative would have fewer impacts on land use, visual resources,biology,and hydrology. It would have greater impacts on traffic,air quality, noise, and energy than the proposed project,and could degrade surface or ground water quality. This alternative would partially meet the project objectives of providing long-term disposal capacity,but would provide about 27 years less of service time since the landfill capacity would be smaller than the proposed project. Not realigning the North Branch of the South Fork of Little Johns Creek could lead to significant water quality problems. This alternative was rejected because it would provide 27 fewer years of waste disposal capacity,could adversely affect water quality,and would require increased haul distances and traffic(to Foothill Landfill)sooner than the proposed project. The Current-Footprint-With-Increased-Elevation-and-Creek-Realignment-SouthAlternative would increase the height of the permitted landfill from 90 feet MSL to 150 feet MSL,and realign part of the North Branch of the South Fork of Little Johns Creek south of the existing landfill site. This alternative would have fewer visual impacts,and greater impacts on traffic,air quality,noise, and energy than the proposed project. This alternative would meet the project objectives of providing long-term disposal capacity,but would provide about 21 years less of service time since the landfill capacity would be smaller than the proposed project. This project was designated as the environmentally superior alternative in the EIR because it would have the least environmental impact,but was rejected because it would provide 21 fewer years of waste disposal capacity,and would require increased haul distances and traffic(to Foothill Landfill) sooner than the proposed project. 60